Do you have adblock enabled?
 
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.

(CBC)   Armstrong stripped of Tour de France titles, Moon Landing   ( cbc.ca) divider line
    More: News, Tour de France, UCI, Court of Arbitration for Sport, Johan Bruyneel, Contador, Andy Schleck, Floyd Landis, Pat McQuaid  
•       •       •

7329 clicks; posted to Sports » on 22 Oct 2012 at 8:44 AM (5 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



482 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2012-10-22 08:44:54 AM  
Good, fark that scum fark.
 
2012-10-22 08:44:57 AM  
Armstrong stripped of Tour de France Titles, staged Moon Landing
 
2012-10-22 08:45:12 AM  
Now I can finally say I've won as many Tour de France races as Lance Armstrong
 
2012-10-22 08:45:19 AM  
Nobody could win 7 consecutive Titles without a little outside help.
 
2012-10-22 08:45:49 AM  
fark cheaters.
 
2012-10-22 08:45:50 AM  
I'll be interested to see how hard they go after the winnings. That should tell you a lot about how much of a witch hunt this is..
 
2012-10-22 08:46:01 AM  
what a wonderful world.
 
2012-10-22 08:46:31 AM  
How can they accuse him of cheating if he never failed a doping test?
 
2012-10-22 08:47:24 AM  
He's such a good guy with such a compelling story that it's such a shame he has to go out this way. He took a sport few people care about and really exploded the amount of attention that it got, and now, to find out he'd been cheating, it's such a letdown.
 
2012-10-22 08:47:27 AM  
Livestrong Lance, and always go ball out in everything you do.

/jackass
//smug motherfarker too
 
2012-10-22 08:47:28 AM  
The medals will go to racers who's doping hasn't been caught yet.
 
2012-10-22 08:47:37 AM  

pag1107: fark cheaters.


If everyone is doing it, is it still cheating? If you prick him, does he not leak HGH?
 
2012-10-22 08:47:47 AM  
Okay, so this means that they are 100% sure that everyone else is clean and Lance was the only cheater right? Right?

Yea, that's what I thought.
 
2012-10-22 08:47:54 AM  
LiveDope strong
 
2012-10-22 08:48:45 AM  
Don't you tools still feel smug wearing those sheep tags...er, Livestrong[tm] bracelets? You know, for "cancer awareness" that gave nothing to research but mostly into his pocket?

P. T. Barnum wins again.
 
2012-10-22 08:48:52 AM  
Lie Strong
 
2012-10-22 08:49:07 AM  

jchic: Okay, so this means that they are 100% sure that everyone else is clean and Lance was the only cheater right? Right?

Yea, that's what I thought.


You don't win 7 titles in a row by playing fair-and-square.

Two...MAYBE 3 Titles I can buy. But 7 in a row? Not unless you're cheating
 
2012-10-22 08:49:10 AM  

destrip: How can they accuse him of cheating if he never failed a doping test?


Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence

/or something
 
2012-10-22 08:49:33 AM  
Does anyone really think the guys who finished second, third, and fourth in all those races weren't doping as well?
 
2012-10-22 08:49:44 AM  
In before the Lance apologists
 
2012-10-22 08:50:26 AM  

destrip: How can they accuse him of cheating if he never failed a doping test?


If you kill a series of people in cold blood but have the good sense to destroy all physical evidence linking you to the crimes, you better believe you'll be convicted if five years later a dozen credible witnesses come forward to testify to your guilt, in detail.
 
2012-10-22 08:50:48 AM  

Sybarite: Does anyone really think the guys who finished second, third, and fourth in all those races weren't doping as well?


Only if it was the same guys SEVEN YEARS IN A ROW.
 
2012-10-22 08:50:53 AM  

Obama4Life: Nobody could win 7 consecutive Titles without a little outside help.


Bill Russell looks at you askance.
 
2012-10-22 08:50:58 AM  
Meh, he doped in a sport where EVERYONE dopes. He just doped better than everyone else..and the French were pissed that a dirty American won 7 straight.
 
2012-10-22 08:51:11 AM  

destrip: How can they accuse him of cheating if he never failed a doping test?


Because he did fail tests when they tested with modern technology?

Doping is always ahead of testing. Plus, he had a doctor help him cheat the tests.
 
2012-10-22 08:51:16 AM  

destrip: How can they accuse him of cheating if he never failed a doping test?


Don't worry about that. They know what is best. For everyone involved. Including Honey Boo Boo.
 
2012-10-22 08:51:30 AM  
BIIIIIIIIIIII-cycle

BIIIIIIIIIIII-cycle

BIIIIIIIIIIII-cycle

I want to ride my bicycle I want to ride my biiiike I want to ride my biCYCLE I want to ride it where I liiiiiiiike

but i can't because I got buuuuuuuusted!
 
2012-10-22 08:51:34 AM  
What a f*cking liar. I knew that damn testicular cancer thing was a cover-up! He had one of his balls surgically removed to be a more competitive cyclist! His junk could then all flop to the same side when biking, allowing him to sprint more easily than those with both testicles!!

!!!!
 
2012-10-22 08:51:57 AM  

To The Escape Zeppelin!: The medals will go to racers who's doping hasn't been caught yet.


So, no one? Didn't just about the entire field get caught those years?
 
2012-10-22 08:52:16 AM  
Who knows where the truth is.
Sad.
 
2012-10-22 08:52:22 AM  
It seems like he was just a better athlete than the other cheaters. From what I gather, a large percentage of these people cheat. So if everyone is cheating, and Lance won, HE'S STILL AWESOME!
 
2012-10-22 08:52:35 AM  

FinFangFark: Meh, he doped in a sport where EVERYONE dopes. He just doped better than everyone else..and the French were pissed that a dirty American won 7 straight.


The United States Anti-Doping Agency is French? Why don't they rename it to the French Anti-Doping Agency? Why the confusing name?
 
2012-10-22 08:53:09 AM  
Tour de France is a harsh mistress
/Link
 
2012-10-22 08:53:12 AM  

lohphat: Don't you tools still feel smug wearing those sheep tags...er, Livestrong[tm] bracelets? You know, for "cancer awareness" that gave nothing to research but mostly into his pocket?

P. T. Barnum wins again.


I am not sure if you are a moron or trolling...
 
2012-10-22 08:54:19 AM  
At least he still has The Ocho.
 
2012-10-22 08:54:20 AM  

intotheabyss81: Livestrong Lance, and always go ball out in everything you do.

/jackass
//smug motherfarker too


That was always my impression of him, too. In interviews I've seen with him, he's just always seemed like kind of an arrogant dick.

/He dumped Cheryl as soon as she announced she had breast cancer.
//Stay classy, Lance.
 
2012-10-22 08:54:28 AM  

starsrift: Who knows where the truth is.


500 piss tests come back clean. You can't retroactively change the rules.
 
2012-10-22 08:54:40 AM  

TeamEd: destrip: How can they accuse him of cheating if he never failed a doping test?

If you kill a series of people in cold blood but have the good sense to destroy all physical evidence linking you to the crimes, you better believe you'll be convicted if five years later a dozen credible witnesses come forward to testify to your guilt, in detail.


/especially if you choose not to fight the charges
 
2012-10-22 08:55:44 AM  
In before the Lance haters.... Oh. Too late. Everyone hates a winner.
 
2012-10-22 08:55:50 AM  

MaudlinMutantMollusk: destrip: How can they accuse him of cheating if he never failed a doping test?

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence

/or something


For serious!

/Sad because I had cancer too
//I took steroids to regain weight, I'd still be in last place if I tried any competitive sport
 
2012-10-22 08:56:26 AM  
So, are they awarding the title to anyone for those years, or just recording no winner? If I recall correctly, every one of the runners-up during that period has been involved in doping of his own.
 
2012-10-22 08:56:38 AM  
Dude had cancer 16 years ago and still alive.
/WINNING
 
2012-10-22 08:56:45 AM  
i just wanna let anyone who uses his charities to somehow defend his cheating that that is a insult to the character of those who would have won if there was no doping in the tour de france, as it assumes they would not be as generous. good deeds do not absolve you of bad deeds. especially if you dont admit to them.
 
2012-10-22 08:56:54 AM  
LOL. Only two of the top ten finishers in 2003 didn't get busted.
 
2012-10-22 08:57:17 AM  
i.imgur.comView Full Size
 
2012-10-22 08:57:36 AM  
hopefully this will reduce the number of douchebag cyclists using roads for exercise equipment and inconveniencing everyone else as they do it.
 
2012-10-22 08:58:08 AM  

earthwirm: In before the Lance haters.... Oh. Too late. Everyone hates a winner.


You sound Republican.
 
2012-10-22 08:58:16 AM  

ripple123: those who would have won if there was no doping in the tour de france


of the 45 riders on the podium between 1996 and 2010, 36 were by cyclists "similarly tainted by doping."

:-/
 
2012-10-22 08:58:36 AM  

dr_blasto: LOL. Only two of the top ten finishers in 2003 didn't get busted.


Ding ding ding. We have a winner.

Armstrong wasn't given any real advantage.
 
2012-10-22 08:58:38 AM  

machoprogrammer: In before the Lance apologists


I won't apologize for him.

However no one gave a crap about cycling before him and no one will likely give a crap about the sport after him.

In between his influence generated millions upon millions for bike manufacturers, clothing makers, membership fees for bicycle race orgs and Christ knows what else.

It's a dumb move to shorten that gravy train a single day longer than it needed to be. For the sake of all parties involved investigations should have concluded for everyone racing, organizing and coaching before they'd outed him.

I know....I know. "Bicycling doesn't need a cheater." Sure. Right. Like the past fifteen years of near light-speed advancements in cycling would have happened without him on the merits of a sport no one gave a shiat about.

Keep thinking that. It'll be important to remember when they're tearing down the velodrome to make way for a skate park.
 
2012-10-22 08:59:12 AM  

Headso: hopefully this will reduce the number of douchebag cyclists using roads for exercise equipment and inconveniencing everyone else as they do it.


And spare us the inappropriate use of Spandex.
 
2012-10-22 08:59:20 AM  
So how much of an edge does doping give you anyway? Are we talking a few seconds, minutes, hours, or how do you measure this sort of thing?
 
2012-10-22 09:00:12 AM  

earthwirm: In before the Lance haters.... Oh. Too late. Everyone hates a winner.


There's a a lot of smug whining in this thread. I glad you all attribute such high morals to riding a goddam bicycle. Get over it. Winners take every advantage and bend every rule. If you you're not cheating, you're not trying. Period.
 
2012-10-22 09:00:53 AM  
I've remember when the french cycling federation accused Lance Armstrong for using performance-enhancing drugs, a horde of americans quickly came up with a bunch of conspiracy theories and repeatedly insulted France.

Now the US anti-doping agency points out the exact same conclusions and I hear no apology being given to France and the french.
 
2012-10-22 09:01:09 AM  

ripple123: i just wanna let anyone who uses his charities to somehow defend his cheating that that is a insult to the character of those who would have won if there was no doping in the tour de france, as it assumes they would not be as generous. good deeds do not absolve you of bad deeds. especially if you dont admit to them.


And, 2005 has only two of the top ten listed as not being busted for PEDs. I'm not certain that defending the character of those who would have won if there was no doping applies as it seems like the only cyclists not using PEDs are the ones commuting to work on a bike.

Bicycles: the new gateway drug.
 
2012-10-22 09:02:30 AM  

doglover: ripple123: those who would have won if there was no doping in the tour de france

of the 45 riders on the podium between 1996 and 2010, 36 were by cyclists "similarly tainted by doping."

:-/


well doglover, i guess that means its probably the guy in 40th or something place whos the actual, deserving, honest and genuine sportsman. my hat off to whoever that person is. and fark the rest.
 
2012-10-22 09:04:22 AM  

drewsclues: earthwirm: In before the Lance haters.... Oh. Too late. Everyone hates a winner.

There's a a lot of smug whining in this thread. I glad you all attribute such high morals to riding a goddam bicycle. Get over it. Winners take every advantage and bend every rule. If you you're not cheating, you're not trying. Period.


You sound Conservative.
 
2012-10-22 09:04:31 AM  
i1151.photobucket.comView Full Size

Gig's up, Lance! Strip out of that spacesuit and GTFO!
 
2012-10-22 09:04:45 AM  

jchic: Okay, so this means that they are 100% sure that everyone else is clean and Lance was the only cheater right? Right?

Yea, that's what I thought.



images.cheezburger.comView Full Size
 
2012-10-22 09:04:59 AM  
The titles are going to nobody. 1999-2005 will go down as having no winner.
 
2012-10-22 09:07:13 AM  

pag1107: fark cheaters.


What about farking non-cheaters? Just sanction it all. You wanna pound HGH into your bloodstream while you train? Go ahead. You don't? Prepare to come in 10th or lower no matter how hard you train.

Just open the doors completely. idk... it's Professional Athletics. There's a lot more at stake than honor.
 
2012-10-22 09:07:39 AM  
He cheated, and was stripped of all his titles, which is right.

The most of the rest of the field also cheated, and so no one will ever know how far down that first guy who didn't cheat is, which is sad.

I feel most sorry for those who thought he was a hero... he very nearly was. But to allow him to get away with it would only encourage another generation to try to get away with cheating. Athletes must know that if they cheat they WILL get caught, if not now, then eventually, and everyone will know.
 
2012-10-22 09:07:45 AM  
This is the epitome of the saying "If is seems too good to be true...."
 
2012-10-22 09:09:04 AM  

Obama4Life: jchic: Okay, so this means that they are 100% sure that everyone else is clean and Lance was the only cheater right? Right?

Yea, that's what I thought.

You don't win 7 titles in a row by playing fair-and-square.

Two...MAYBE 3 Titles I can buy. But 7 in a row? Not unless you're cheating


I thought your comment said Four Square, and I was about to get angry. I am a bad ass in Four Square, and I don't cheat.

/still living the glory days of 5th grade
 
2012-10-22 09:09:30 AM  

destrip: How can they accuse him of cheating if he never failed a doping test?


And we're done.
(not really, but we should be.)

All of the evidence is circumstantial at best. Guilt by association is not evidence. If he used, I'm all for stripping his titles. But come up with better evidence than disgruntled non-winners and "because he was around other users, he must have used" crap.
 
2012-10-22 09:09:34 AM  

ripple123: doglover: ripple123: those who would have won if there was no doping in the tour de france

of the 45 riders on the podium between 1996 and 2010, 36 were by cyclists "similarly tainted by doping."

:-/

well doglover, i guess that means its probably the guy in 40th or something place whos the actual, deserving, honest and genuine sportsman. my hat off to whoever that person is. and fark the rest.


I would bet that "actual honest sportsman"=guy who doesn't get hired onto a team.
 
2012-10-22 09:09:43 AM  

Skarekrough: However no one gave a crap about cycling before him and no one will likely give a crap about the sport after him.


startwithtypewriters.comView Full Size

3 time Tour de France winner and former Taco Bell pitchman Greg Lemond may beg to differ. Just because you yourself don't remember something doesn't mean it didn't hapen.
 
2012-10-22 09:10:07 AM  

TheVeryDeadIanMartin: So how much of an edge does doping give you anyway? Are we talking a few seconds, minutes, hours, or how do you measure this sort of thing?


It depends. In some things, not much, in others? A ton. There's one climb on a stage that shows up on the Tour de France pretty regularly and it's a really tough climb. This year the fastest time from start to finish of the climb was in the ball park of abut 54 minutes. Armstrong at one point did the climb in 46 minutes. And starting in the mind 90s the time for the climb started going down awful fast, far faster than one would expect simply from improved training and bicycles. And then a few years back the times shot right back up. The improvement in times in the mid to late 90s was a greater improvement than had been seen in the previous 20 years, a time where the design and construction of racing bicycles advanced by leaps and bounds and training was also much improved. And there were cyclists who had no business doing the climb in 52 or 53 minutes doing it that fast. When riders who aren't seen as particularly good climbers are finishing one of the toughest climbs on the Tour faster than previous riders who were seen as exceptional climbers, yeah something is up.
 
2012-10-22 09:10:34 AM  

Obama4Life: Nobody could win 7 consecutive Titles without a little outside help.


Which is why they should investigate Michael Schumacher. He must have been injecting nitrous oxide into his engine.

/derp
 
2012-10-22 09:10:36 AM  

markfara: That was always my impression of him, too. In interviews I've seen with him, he's just always seemed like kind of an arrogant dick.

/He dumped Cheryl as soon as she announced she had breast cancer.
//Stay classy, Lance.


Not quite. She wanted to marry and have kids right away, and Lance Armstrong wasn't particularly inclined to that.

You may accuse him of being a douche for not getting married agains his wishes, but breast cancer had nothign to do with it.
 
2012-10-22 09:10:46 AM  
Whatever.

maggoo: I've remember when the french cycling federation accused Lance Armstrong for using performance-enhancing drugs, a horde of americans quickly came up with a bunch of conspiracy theories and repeatedly insulted France.

Now the US anti-doping agency points out the exact same conclusions and I hear no apology being given to France and the french.


DIAF surrender monkeys... You too maggoo.
 
2012-10-22 09:10:49 AM  
I guess the saddest part is that the sport and the Tour will be hurt the most. It's like finding out Michael Jordan cheated and then was stripped of his titles.

//From what I understand, Cycling during this period was like Major League Baseball in the 90's.
 
2012-10-22 09:11:07 AM  
If you prick us, do we not bleed?

if you tickle us, do we not laugh?

if you poison us, do we not die?

.....and if you wrong us, shall we not revenge?
 
2012-10-22 09:11:15 AM  
FTFA: "The agency said 20 of the 21 riders on the podium in the Tour from 1999 through 2005 have been "directly tied to likely doping through admissions, sanctions, public investigations" or other means. It added that of the 45 riders on the podium between 1996 and 2010, 36 were by cyclists "similarly tainted by doping.""

So, Lance was just a more sophisticated and shady cheater and somehow worse. Sounds like all professional cyclists are cheating coonts.

From the looks of it, any Farker here would just need to show up and complete the race. It could take you weeks. But you'd be the only person who didn't dope, and you'd win.
 
2012-10-22 09:11:27 AM  
And now I wonder if I'm the only one who feels consistent about this issue. In the mid 2000's I thought "Bullshiat he "passed his doping test"... You don't go from having ball cancer to winning the TDF in the space of 18 months without a little help. And people have been beating doping tests for 20 years now. You know, since the inception of doping tests. Anyone who believes this is a gullible idiot.

...

However, who cares if he was doping? His EXCLUSIVE purpose in life is to entertain us with astonishing acts of athletic prowess. He used those drugs to raise money for cancer, for himself, for his sport, for his team. I couldn't be bothered to be outraged when the first wave of accusations came out (and I believed them), and I can't be bothered now.
 
2012-10-22 09:11:52 AM  

kregh99: destrip: How can they accuse him of cheating if he never failed a doping test?

And we're done.
(not really, but we should be.)

All of the evidence is circumstantial at best. Guilt by association is not evidence. If he used, I'm all for stripping his titles. But come up with better evidence than disgruntled non-winners and "because he was around other users, he must have used" crap.


Here is a list of all the non-circumstantial and non-hearsay evidence against Armstrong:

end
 
2012-10-22 09:12:05 AM  
Why ban Armstrong for life, but give Floyd Landis and Contador a comparative break?
 
2012-10-22 09:12:38 AM  

maggoo: markfara: That was always my impression of him, too. In interviews I've seen with him, he's just always seemed like kind of an arrogant dick.

/He dumped Cheryl as soon as she announced she had breast cancer.
//Stay classy, Lance.

Not quite. She wanted to marry and have kids right away, and Lance Armstrong wasn't particularly inclined to that.

You may accuse him of being a douche for not getting married agains his wishes, but breast cancer had nothign to do with it.


I thought he was a douche for initially dropping his wife so he could pork an ageing pop singer. I'm shocked she didn't reveal any stories about having to be her ex's dope mule.
 
2012-10-22 09:12:41 AM  

lohphat: drewsclues: earthwirm: In before the Lance haters.... Oh. Too late. Everyone hates a winner.

There's a a lot of smug whining in this thread. I glad you all attribute such high morals to riding a goddam bicycle. Get over it. Winners take every advantage and bend every rule. If you you're not cheating, you're not trying. Period.

You sound Conservative.


Liberal as they come. I just don't think sports matter enough in the world to get all pissed when someone bends to rules to their advantage. Don't want to get pissed when people make money off cheating at sports? Stop paying billions to the people that play the games. Simple as that.
 
2012-10-22 09:13:47 AM  
Jesus. At this point, just let them dope. Or have it as one of the ways to win: a doping and a non-doping medal. They already have a mountain winner, a time winner, a points winner, a young winner, a most agressive winner, and a winning team. Just ad a "doping winner".
 
2012-10-22 09:14:45 AM  
Most of them devolving to other people convicted of steroid use.
 
2012-10-22 09:15:25 AM  
Liestrong
 
2012-10-22 09:15:28 AM  

To The Escape Zeppelin!: The medals will go to racers who's doping hasn't been caught yet.


Exactly why they're leaving the victories blank.
 
2012-10-22 09:15:32 AM  
So they finally burned their witch.

And all the newts rejoiced

sheTurnedMeIntoANewt.jpg
 
2012-10-22 09:15:59 AM  

Obama4Life: Two...MAYBE 3 Titles I can buy. B


Miguel Indurain won 5 in a row and there's no real cloud over him. Then again he won his last tour in 95, that would be the tour when times for various stages starting go all sorts of crazy though it started happening already the year before.
 
kab
2012-10-22 09:16:39 AM  
And the powers that be continue their trend of diminishing the relevance of the worlds most prestigious bike race.

Good job.
 
2012-10-22 09:17:22 AM  

maggoo: I've remember when the french cycling federation accused Lance Armstrong for using performance-enhancing drugs, a horde of americans quickly came up with a bunch of conspiracy theories and repeatedly insulted France.

Now the US anti-doping agency points out the exact same conclusions and I hear no apology being given to France and the french.


Je suis désolé.
 
2012-10-22 09:17:54 AM  

kab: And the powers that be continue their trend of diminishing the relevance of the worlds most prestigious bike race.

Good job.


Clearly, this is the work of the reverse vampires.
 
2012-10-22 09:19:22 AM  
I quit paying attention to sports "heros" a number of years ago. They all cut corners to get where they are and any attention paid is time wasted.

That said, I always wondered how he managed to do it after his treatment. I wonder if that was fake, too?
 
2012-10-22 09:20:34 AM  

Obama4Life: Nobody could win 7 consecutive Titles without a little outside help.


i129.photobucket.comView Full Size


Unless of course the event is exactly the same or very close to the same thing over and over again.

/thinks there's too many olympic swimming events.
//Doesn't consider Phelps having more than 2 or 3 gold medals at most.
 
2012-10-22 09:21:03 AM  

kregh99: destrip: How can they accuse him of cheating if he never failed a doping test?

And we're done.
(not really, but we should be.)

All of the evidence is circumstantial at best. Guilt by association is not evidence. If he used, I'm all for stripping his titles. But come up with better evidence than disgruntled non-winners and "because he was around other users, he must have used" crap.


There's quite a few witnesses who were on his own cycling team who also testified against him, 11 of them apparently. These aren't a few disgruntled losers, they're his team mates, and the number of them testifying against him would make it a pretty unlikely conspiracy.
 
2012-10-22 09:21:43 AM  

EyeballKid: Skarekrough: However no one gave a crap about cycling before him and no one will likely give a crap about the sport after him.

[startwithtypewriters.com image 298x449]
3 time Tour de France winner and former Taco Bell pitchman Greg Lemond may beg to differ. Just because you yourself don't remember something doesn't mean it didn't hapen.


Don't forget "bike builder".

Love my Lemond
 
2012-10-22 09:21:46 AM  
ny-image1.etsy.comView Full Size
 
2012-10-22 09:22:05 AM  

Molavian: What a f*cking liar. I knew that damn testicular cancer thing was a cover-up! He had one of his balls surgically removed to be a more competitive cyclist! His junk could then all flop to the same side when biking, allowing him to sprint more easily than those with both testicles!!

!!!!


Would you call a cyclist with one ball a Unicycler?
 
2012-10-22 09:23:14 AM  
None of these revelations are of much suprise to most of the cyclists I know. Most didn't know what a jerk he was though until reading the affidavits on the USADA website.

Zabriskie's, in particular, is pretty sickening.
 
2012-10-22 09:23:30 AM  

TheVeryDeadIanMartin: So how much of an edge does doping give you anyway? Are we talking a few seconds, minutes, hours, or how do you measure this sort of thing?


EPO will improve performance by about 5% which is the difference between the middle of the tour de france and no one has ever heard of you to winning it.
 
2012-10-22 09:23:46 AM  
GIS "Lance Armstrong ripped"

That's why he won
 
2012-10-22 09:24:08 AM  

jchic: Okay, so this means that they are 100% sure that everyone else is clean and Lance was the only cheater right? Right?

Yea, that's what I thought.


Both sides are bad, so vote (R)mstrong.
 
2012-10-22 09:24:26 AM  

EyeballKid: 3 time Tour de France winner and former Taco Bell pitchman Greg Lemond may beg to differ.


Who?
 
2012-10-22 09:25:14 AM  
I don't get the uproar. All elite-level athletes should be allowed to use whatever drugs they want, there's a fine line between legal supplements and banned drugs (caffeine and ADHD medications are banned at the college level, for instance, and half the shiat I take for recreational lifting is legal but on the WADA list).
 
2012-10-22 09:25:48 AM  
Meanwhile, most other professional athletes shrug while taking today's dose of performance enhancing drugs.
 
2012-10-22 09:26:06 AM  

Joe Peanut: Obama4Life: Nobody could win 7 consecutive Titles without a little outside help.

Which is why they should investigate Michael Schumacher. He must have been injecting nitrous oxide into his engine.

/derp


I seem to remember stories of Schumacher underfilling his gas tank to get a weight advantage and then rolling through the gravel at the end of his races so his tires would pick up gravel and make up the difference when his car was weighed.

But your starry eyed allegiance to Lance is noted.

/If I dislike Armstrong for anything, it's the influx of spandex laden cyclists who seem to think that coasting around shoulderless country roads is a "sport" if you are wearing spandex with sponsors names all over it.
 
2012-10-22 09:29:23 AM  

EyeballKid: Skarekrough: However no one gave a crap about cycling before him and no one will likely give a crap about the sport after him.

[startwithtypewriters.com image 298x449]
3 time Tour de France winner and former Taco Bell pitchman Greg Lemond may beg to differ. Just because you yourself don't remember something doesn't mean it didn't hapen.


Another doper.
 
2012-10-22 09:29:25 AM  

Matrix Flavored Wasabi: I don't get the uproar. All elite-level athletes should be allowed to use whatever drugs they want, there's a fine line between legal supplements and banned drugs (caffeine and ADHD medications are banned at the college level, for instance, and half the shiat I take for recreational lifting is legal but on the WADA list).


This.

Anyone who's proper outraged about doping... doesn't understand it very well.
 
2012-10-22 09:29:46 AM  

maggoo: markfara: That was always my impression of him, too. In interviews I've seen with him, he's just always seemed like kind of an arrogant dick.

/He dumped Cheryl as soon as she announced she had breast cancer.
//Stay classy, Lance.

Not quite. She wanted to marry and have kids right away, and Lance Armstrong wasn't particularly inclined to that.

You may accuse him of being a douche for not getting married agains his wishes, but breast cancer had nothign to do with it.


we all know correllation = causation.

They happend close together so one caused the other. End. Of. Story.
 
2012-10-22 09:30:05 AM  

EyeballKid: Skarekrough: However no one gave a crap about cycling before him and no one will likely give a crap about the sport after him.

[startwithtypewriters.com image 298x449]
3 time Tour de France winner and former Taco Bell pitchman Greg Lemond may beg to differ. Just because you yourself don't remember something doesn't mean it didn't hapen.


No, I remember.

But the general public does, vaguely.

You missed the point though. What has Greg done for the sport of cycling lately and how does it compare to what Lance's influence has been upon it over the past decade or so?

When you're a sport nearly devoid of "rock stars" it's stupid to take one down any earlier than absolutely necessary, especially when his presence has advanced it as much as it has.

Yeah, he cheated, big farking deal. Your membership numbers are up, kids are buying bikes, the amateur circuit is bigger than it has ever been and big-name bike manufacturers have hardcore money to throw at RandD to make then next great bike. The org isn't going to lose ANY integrity by taking its time and being thorough and investigating all aspects of all athletes involved.
 
2012-10-22 09:32:21 AM  

Skarekrough: You missed the point though. What has Greg done for the sport of cycling lately and how does it compare to what Lance's influence has been upon it over the past decade or so?

When you're a sport nearly devoid of "rock stars" it's stupid to take one down any earlier than absolutely necessary, especially when his presence has advanced it as much as it has.


Without Greg Lemond, there's no precedent for Blackball Armstrong to become the "rock star" of his sport.

Skarekrough: Yeah, he cheated, big farking deal.



It's disturbing how prevalent this line of thinking is. Are there really this many self-centered, shiatty parents?
 
2012-10-22 09:32:23 AM  

max_pooper: Here is a list of all the non-circumstantial and non-hearsay evidence against Armstrong:

end


Do you know how I know that you don't know what those terms mean?

kriegfusion: Obama4Life: Nobody could win 7 consecutive Titles without a little outside help.

[i129.photobucket.com image 300x300]

Unless of course the event is exactly the same or very close to the same thing over and over again.

/thinks there's too many olympic swimming events.
//Doesn't consider Phelps having more than 2 or 3 gold medals at most.


I wouldn't be shocked if Phelps, or any Olympian, was doping as well. They very likely all dope.
 
2012-10-22 09:32:31 AM  
periodistadigital.comView Full Size
 
2012-10-22 09:33:04 AM  

Sudo_Make_Me_A_Sandwich: He's such a good guy with such a compelling story that it's such a shame he has to go out this way. He took a sport few people care about and really exploded the amount of attention that it got, and now, to find out he'd been cheating, it's such a letdown.


He's not "such a good guy". I live 25 miles from where he grew up and he's universally known, on a personal level, to be a giant douchebag narcissist asshole. He's terribly rude and condescending. He just got cancer and it made him a sympathetic figure.

Overall his presence on earth has been positive because of the amount of cancer research his cause has funded. But make no mistake if you knew him personally you would consider him a huge dick.
 
2012-10-22 09:33:50 AM  

kriegfusion: Obama4Life: Nobody could win 7 consecutive Titles without a little outside help.

[i129.photobucket.com image 300x300]

Unless of course the event is exactly the same or very close to the same thing over and over again.

/thinks there's too many olympic swimming events.
//Doesn't consider Phelps having more than 2 or 3 gold medals at most.


Michael Phelps has exactly 0 gold medals.

He has Olympic wins, yes. Not denying that. But if you melted down all of his medals and smelted out just the gold, you might get enough for a pinkie ring.
 
2012-10-22 09:33:56 AM  

Joe Peanut: Obama4Life: Nobody could win 7 consecutive Titles without a little outside help.

Which is why they should investigate Michael Schumacher. He must have been injecting nitrous oxide into his engine.

/derp


7 out of 11 championships in a sport where most of the time there are only 2 or at most 3 competitive teams is not really all that comparable to what Armstrong "achieved".
 
2012-10-22 09:34:32 AM  

Sybarite: Does anyone really think the guys who finished second, third, and fourth in all those races weren't doping as well?


Most of those guys have already been caught. One of the problems with stripping him of his titles is, who do you give them to? They're going to have to find someone no one's ever cared enough to scrutinize. And when they scrutinize him, they're going to find he cheated, too.
 
2012-10-22 09:35:49 AM  

machoprogrammer: max_pooper: Here is a list of all the non-circumstantial and non-hearsay evidence against Armstrong:

end

Do you know how I know that you don't know what those terms mean?


Why don't you enlighten us? Please provide all the evidence used against Armstrong that is not hearsay or circumstantial.
 
2012-10-22 09:36:51 AM  

oldfarthenry: [i1151.photobucket.com image 550x550]
Gig's up, Lance! Strip out of that spacesuit and GTFO!


Why would they put velcro on the inside of the helmet if they're on a sound stage. Just lift the visor and scratch your nose.
 
2012-10-22 09:38:03 AM  

kriegfusion: Obama4Life: Nobody could win 7 consecutive Titles without a little outside help.

[i129.photobucket.com image 300x300]

Unless of course the event is exactly the same or very close to the same thing over and over again.

/thinks there's too many olympic swimming events.
//Doesn't consider Phelps having more than 2 or 3 gold medals at most.


his "dope" has a downer effect, not performance enhancing.
 
2012-10-22 09:38:07 AM  
When they say doping, what kind of dope did he use?
 
2012-10-22 09:38:18 AM  

rumpelstiltskin: Sybarite: Does anyone really think the guys who finished second, third, and fourth in all those races weren't doping as well?

Most of those guys have already been caught. One of the problems with stripping him of his titles is, who do you give them to? They're going to have to find someone no one's ever cared enough to scrutinize. And when they scrutinize him, they're going to find he cheated, too.


A lot acknowledge that to ride with the pro European peleton in that era, you pretty much had to dope. Some did more successfully than others.
 
2012-10-22 09:38:30 AM  
OH what a happy and morning of relief!
I knew Lance Cheatwrong was dirty before he finished a TFD in 1996
then he grew into a big asre, and pissed alot of cyclist off.
what lost my respect for this pile of crap was he only trained for July.
then the sneaking of blood before races and being tipped off when the test were scheduled.
He deserves a life of shame!

escume me, i need update some wiki pages!
Vamos Banesto!
 
2012-10-22 09:38:39 AM  

doglover: kriegfusion: Obama4Life: Nobody could win 7 consecutive Titles without a little outside help.

[i129.photobucket.com image 300x300]

Unless of course the event is exactly the same or very close to the same thing over and over again.

/thinks there's too many olympic swimming events.
//Doesn't consider Phelps having more than 2 or 3 gold medals at most.

Michael Phelps has exactly 0 gold medals.

He has Olympic wins, yes. Not denying that. But if you melted down all of his medals and smelted out just the gold, you might get enough for a pinkie ring.


Really? This is what this thread has devolved into?
 
2012-10-22 09:39:03 AM  
Yet Barry Bond's record still stands
 
2012-10-22 09:39:26 AM  

maddermaxx: kregh99: destrip: How can they accuse him of cheating if he never failed a doping test?

And we're done.
(not really, but we should be.)

All of the evidence is circumstantial at best. Guilt by association is not evidence. If he used, I'm all for stripping his titles. But come up with better evidence than disgruntled non-winners and "because he was around other users, he must have used" crap.

There's quite a few witnesses who were on his own cycling team who also testified against him, 11 of them apparently. These aren't a few disgruntled losers, they're his team mates, and the number of them testifying against him would make it a pretty unlikely conspiracy.


absolutely.. We all know how quantity of testimony improves its truthyness.

Just look at the inquisition, Salem witch trial, mcmartin pre-school, the billions who testify to the truth of various scriptures. All that testimony that physically impossible things happened means they did occur!
 
2012-10-22 09:39:29 AM  

maddermaxx: There's quite a few witnesses who were on his own cycling team who also testified against him, 11 of them apparently. These aren't a few disgruntled losers, they're his team mates, and the number of them testifying against him would make it a pretty unlikely conspiracy.


It totally makes sense that everyone who ever knew him in any way has come forward and apparently lied about him just for the fun of slandering him. And the labs illegally spiked his urine tests after the fact. It's much easier to believe that dozens upon dozens of people, many of whom don't even know him, were forced to break laws in order to slander Armstrong, who clearly came back from cancer after not really having won much before it and got superpowers, magically beating everyone in the world, who WAS doping.

If all your teammates LIED in order to discredit you, you are probably the most consummate asshole hin the history of the world. So he's either a cheater and a regular ol' asshole or he's the biggest asshole ever. Either way, I don't have a problem with besh*tting his career.
 
2012-10-22 09:39:43 AM  
Races are won in the court room.
 
2012-10-22 09:40:20 AM  

NeoBad: When they say doping, what kind of dope did he use?

"His goal led him to depend on EPO, testosterone and blood transfusions but also, more ruthlessly, to expect and to require that his teammates would likewise use drugs to support his goals if not their own," the agency said in its 202-page report.

 
2012-10-22 09:40:45 AM  

kregh99: destrip: How can they accuse him of cheating if he never failed a doping test?

And we're done.
(not really, but we should be.)

All of the evidence is circumstantial at best. Guilt by association is not evidence. If he used, I'm all for stripping his titles. But come up with better evidence than disgruntled non-winners and "because he was around other users, he must have used" crap.


You should invite Barry Bonds, Roger Clemens, and Lance over for tea. Or a book club. You could all have a wonderfully honest conversation.
 
kab
2012-10-22 09:40:57 AM  

Joe Peanut: Which is why they should investigate Michael Schumacher. He must have been injecting nitrous oxide into his engine.

/derp



Yes, F1 teams never ever cheat. No sir.
 
2012-10-22 09:41:52 AM  

EyeballKid: Skarekrough: You missed the point though. What has Greg done for the sport of cycling lately and how does it compare to what Lance's influence has been upon it over the past decade or so?

When you're a sport nearly devoid of "rock stars" it's stupid to take one down any earlier than absolutely necessary, especially when his presence has advanced it as much as it has.

Without Greg Lemond, there's no precedent for Blackball Armstrong to become the "rock star" of his sport.

Skarekrough: Yeah, he cheated, big farking deal.


It's disturbing how prevalent this line of thinking is. Are there really this many self-centered, shiatty parents?


Society does it. Amazing how much outrage this causes when it means nothing in life yet thoses who are "Cheating" our laws on immigration get an "Aww shucks, its too hard to do it without cheating" and yet you want me to be outraged about some sportts cheating? Or the institutionalized cheating on admissions and such with afirmative action? Please.
 
2012-10-22 09:41:52 AM  

EyeballKid: Skarekrough: You missed the point though. What has Greg done for the sport of cycling lately and how does it compare to what Lance's influence has been upon it over the past decade or so?

When you're a sport nearly devoid of "rock stars" it's stupid to take one down any earlier than absolutely necessary, especially when his presence has advanced it as much as it has.

Without Greg Lemond, there's no precedent for Blackball Armstrong to become the "rock star" of his sport.

Skarekrough: Yeah, he cheated, big farking deal.


It's disturbing how prevalent this line of thinking is. Are there really this many self-centered, shiatty parents?


It's a sporting event. It should be as relevant as how much basil you smell in your own farts.
 
2012-10-22 09:42:13 AM  

NeoBad: When they say doping, what kind of dope did he use?


Erythropoietin, HGH, testosterone (which they thought made the EPO more effective), cortisone, and blood doping are the big ones I've read about.

Blood doping is the practice of withdrawing your own blood months before a big event and transfusing it back into yourself just before the event.
 
2012-10-22 09:42:15 AM  

EyeballKid: Skarekrough: You missed the point though. What has Greg done for the sport of cycling lately and how does it compare to what Lance's influence has been upon it over the past decade or so?

When you're a sport nearly devoid of "rock stars" it's stupid to take one down any earlier than absolutely necessary, especially when his presence has advanced it as much as it has.

Without Greg Lemond, there's no precedent for Blackball Armstrong to become the "rock star" of his sport.

Skarekrough: Yeah, he cheated, big farking deal.


It's disturbing how prevalent this line of thinking is. Are there really this many self-centered, shiatty parents?


Explain.

What did he do to cheat? Should it be considered cheating and why? Given all he accomplished both personally and for his sport and surrounding organizations, can we establish a moral framework in which to judge him or others who "cheat" in this way?
 
2012-10-22 09:42:18 AM  
So let me get this straight. He's an apparently healthy individual now that, in the past, dominated a sport after being sick. And people are mad at him becuase he used performance enhancing drugs; otherwise known as vitamins or dope. And the thing dominating the minds of sheeple is "cheating?"

I'm disappointed.
 
2012-10-22 09:43:14 AM  

doglover: kriegfusion: Obama4Life: Nobody could win 7 consecutive Titles without a little outside help.

[i129.photobucket.com image 300x300]

Unless of course the event is exactly the same or very close to the same thing over and over again.

/thinks there's too many olympic swimming events.
//Doesn't consider Phelps having more than 2 or 3 gold medals at most.

Michael Phelps has exactly 0 gold medals.

He has Olympic wins, yes. Not denying that. But if you melted down all of his medals and smelted out just the gold, you might get enough for a pinkie ring.


The IOC rules state that each gold medal must contain 6 grams of gold. With 18 golds, that adds up to 108 grams, or 3.81 ounces of gold.

That pinkie ring sounds kind of heavy.
 
2012-10-22 09:43:27 AM  

jchic: Okay, so this means that they are 100% sure that everyone else is clean and Lance was the only cheater right? Right?

Yea, that's what I thought.


FTA: "USADA also thinks the Tour titles should not be given to other riders who finished on the podium, such was the level of doping during Armstrong's era."

Wow, you're an idiot.
 
2012-10-22 09:43:53 AM  
Oh no he used steroids in a sport where everyone used steroids! So officially no one won all those years since?
 
2012-10-22 09:45:34 AM  

tomWright: maddermaxx: kregh99: destrip: How can they accuse him of cheating if he never failed a doping test?

And we're done.
(not really, but we should be.)

All of the evidence is circumstantial at best. Guilt by association is not evidence. If he used, I'm all for stripping his titles. But come up with better evidence than disgruntled non-winners and "because he was around other users, he must have used" crap.

There's quite a few witnesses who were on his own cycling team who also testified against him, 11 of them apparently. These aren't a few disgruntled losers, they're his team mates, and the number of them testifying against him would make it a pretty unlikely conspiracy.

absolutely.. We all know how quantity of testimony improves its truthyness.

Just look at the inquisition, Salem witch trial, mcmartin pre-school, the billions who testify to the truth of various scriptures. All that testimony that physically impossible things happened means they did occur!


Who, precisely, would you believe then?

I mean, these people, many famous cyclists in their own right admitted to doping themselves in order to testify against Lance Armstrong. Seriously, your analogy doesn't work at all because these people aren't just saying lance did something bad, they are admitting, painfully, that they did too, and they will suffer setbacks for that themselves.
 
2012-10-22 09:45:53 AM  

kab: Joe Peanut: Which is why they should investigate Michael Schumacher. He must have been injecting nitrous oxide into his engine.

/derp


Yes, F1 teams never ever cheat. No sir.


Yeah, farking DonCHEATY won the Indy 500 this year by running Sato off the road.

asshole.
 
2012-10-22 09:46:35 AM  

Carth: Oh no he used steroids in a sport where everyone used steroids! So officially no one won all those years since?


jeez loiuse, not every cyclist doped to win, lance and USPS cheated every race!
which is not hard to do iif one races only n july!
 
2012-10-22 09:46:44 AM  
I dont care if he was doping or not .
This is a witch hunt.

//that is all
 
2012-10-22 09:48:23 AM  

expobill: Carth: Oh no he used steroids in a sport where everyone used steroids! So officially no one won all those years since?

jeez loiuse, not every cyclist doped to win, lance and USPS cheated every race!
which is not hard to do iif one races only n july!


What place do you need to go back to in Lances Tour de France wins to find someone who was still believed to be clean? Were there any in the top 10 or top 20?
 
2012-10-22 09:48:34 AM  

give me doughnuts: That pinkie ring sounds kind of heavy.


I have big hands.
 
2012-10-22 09:48:56 AM  
Well, if the government says he cheated, that's good enough for me.

Why yes, I'd love to buy that oceanfront property in Wyoming you're selling; sounds like a heck of a deal!
 
2012-10-22 09:49:52 AM  
FTA: "The agency said 20 of the 21 riders on the podium in the Tour from 1999 through 2005 have been "directly tied to likely doping through admissions, sanctions, public investigations" or other means. It added that of the 45 riders on the podium between 1996 and 2010, 36 were by cyclists "similarly tainted by doping." "

Not saying that doping is right, but after reading that, I half don't blame him. Now, the allegations about trafficking coercing people into doping should be dealt accordingly. But it almost seems silly at this point to punish willing participants in doping, when you basically had to if you were to remain competitive.

What matters now is how the UCI handles drug testing from here on out in professional cycling. If they are truly serious, they will clean house...**cue the sound of audience laughter**
 
2012-10-22 09:51:34 AM  

Girion47: Yeah, farking DonCHEATY won the Indy 500 this year by running Sato off the road.

asshole.


That's not F1, and Franchitti won clean as a whistle.
 
2012-10-22 09:51:41 AM  

Carth: Oh no he used steroids in a sport where everyone used steroids! So officially no one won all those years since?


That is in fact their official position at the moment. Yes. It's retarded.

If everyone is "cheating", couldn't we just call that "training"?
 
2012-10-22 09:51:48 AM  

BeesNuts: EyeballKid: Skarekrough: You missed the point though. What has Greg done for the sport of cycling lately and how does it compare to what Lance's influence has been upon it over the past decade or so?

When you're a sport nearly devoid of "rock stars" it's stupid to take one down any earlier than absolutely necessary, especially when his presence has advanced it as much as it has.

Without Greg Lemond, there's no precedent for Blackball Armstrong to become the "rock star" of his sport.

Skarekrough: Yeah, he cheated, big farking deal.


It's disturbing how prevalent this line of thinking is. Are there really this many self-centered, shiatty parents?

Explain.

What did he do to cheat? Should it be considered cheating and why? Given all he accomplished both personally and for his sport and surrounding organizations, can we establish a moral framework in which to judge him or others who "cheat" in this way?


I'm going to do a bad just at this but... if the testimony of all is teammates is to be believed he cheated by himself taking substances banned by the governing body under which he was racing and engaging in the organization of a doping program for his team. It should be considered cheating because it was against the rules of fair play, it was deceitful and manipulative, and gave an unfair edge against clean cyclists.

The moral framework is- you agree to a set of rules before competing. If you deliberately break these rules and enable, encourage and coerce others to do so while you actively avoid being caught by people trying to enforce these rules, then you are immoral.
 
2012-10-22 09:53:34 AM  

Mose: The moral framework is- you agree to a set of rules before competing. If you deliberately break these rules and enable, encourage and coerce others to do so while you actively avoid being caught by people trying to enforce these rules, then you are immoral.


But, you see, this situation was different from every other moral quandary you could imagine, because in this case, everybody was doing it!

Seriously, nobody here has told a child that used the "everybody's doing it" excuse to fark the fark off with that bullshiat?
 
2012-10-22 09:54:22 AM  

drewsclues: lohphat: drewsclues: earthwirm: In before the Lance haters.... Oh. Too late. Everyone hates a winner.

There's a a lot of smug whining in this thread. I glad you all attribute such high morals to riding a goddam bicycle. Get over it. Winners take every advantage and bend every rule. If you you're not cheating, you're not trying. Period.

You sound Conservative.

Liberal as they come. I just don't think sports matter enough in the world to get all pissed when someone bends to rules to their advantage. Don't want to get pissed when people make money off cheating at sports? Stop paying billions to the people that play the games. Simple as that.


And yet your attitude describes the Republican platform perfectly.
 
2012-10-22 09:54:25 AM  
At least this witch hunt is finally over. I've been a big Lance fan for years and never had any doubts about him doping, it was pretty obvious. Cycling is one of, if not the dirtiest sport in the world. Everyone around him was doping, he was too. And he still won 7 in a row, He was still the best.

It's pretty well known that Lance Armstrong is a gigantic asshole, but he's done a lot of good as well. His foundation has raised an incredible amount of money for cancer research, and Lance himself brought cycling into prominence in the United States.

Kind of sad that they had to make an example of someone, but if they did, he was the obvious choice. He was an asshole, hated by the Europeans, and he won 7 tours in a row. You wanna make an example of someone? Go after the biggest, and that's what they did. I personally have never given a shiat if he was doping, everyone was and he was still the best. He'll always be one of the greats anyway, it's tough to demonize a doper in a sport where everyone is cheating. And he trained like a motherf*cking animal.
 
d23 [BareFark]
2012-10-22 09:55:20 AM  
maybe doping should be mandatory.
 
2012-10-22 09:55:26 AM  
But he did win 7 Tour de France victories and they can never take that away....oh, wait...
 
kab
2012-10-22 09:55:45 AM  

maddermaxx: I mean, these people, many famous cyclists in their own right admitted to doping themselves in order to testify against Lance Armstrong.


More than a few of them tested positive themselves, and were either removed from races or stripped after the fact.

If the Armstrong investigation level of effort and scrutiny were applied to every other tour winner since '65, I wonder how many 'legitimate' winners you'd actually end up with.

The sport needs to, at some point, draw a conclusion that if you win, and a year or so goes by with no testing proof otherwise, then you stay in the record book and the sport just moves on.

Otherwise, you get the current situation that who gets busted for dope is bigger news than who actually wins, which is very bad for the sport.
 
2012-10-22 09:55:59 AM  

BeesNuts: Carth: Oh no he used steroids in a sport where everyone used steroids! So officially no one won all those years since?

That is in fact their official position at the moment. Yes. It's retarded.

If everyone is "cheating", couldn't we just call that "training"?


Exactly. If the goal of anti-doping rules is to create a level playing ground, but all the top athletes are doping anyways we still have a level playing ground just not the one the officials wanted.
 
2012-10-22 09:56:31 AM  

maggoo: I've remember when the french cycling federation accused Lance Armstrong for using performance-enhancing drugs, a horde of americans quickly came up with a bunch of conspiracy theories and repeatedly insulted France.

Now the US anti-doping agency points out the exact same conclusions and I hear no apology being given to France and the french.


Because they had no evidence.


dr_blasto: Why ban Armstrong for life, but give Floyd Landis and Contador a comparative break?


Didn't they admit it?
 
2012-10-22 09:57:35 AM  

Mose: The moral framework is- you agree to a set of rules before competing. If you deliberately break these rules and enable, encourage and coerce others to do so while you actively avoid being caught by people trying to enforce these rules, then you are immoral.


But if you don't get caught, it's a W in the Spartan playbook.
 
2012-10-22 09:57:38 AM  
RCA tried to take his patents about FM from him.

upload.wikimedia.orgView Full Size


Eventually, the courts ruled in his favour.
 
2012-10-22 09:57:47 AM  

Carth: BeesNuts: Carth: Oh no he used steroids in a sport where everyone used steroids! So officially no one won all those years since?

That is in fact their official position at the moment. Yes. It's retarded.

If everyone is "cheating", couldn't we just call that "training"?

Exactly. If the goal of anti-doping rules is to create a level playing ground, but all the top athletes are doping anyways we still have a level playing ground just not the one the officials wanted.


Yeah but who cares what enhanced people can do? I think the anti-doping measures are because we want to see what a human can do without outside help, it's inspiring. What isn't is knowing I can take a 20 to mexico and get a shortcut to athletic prowess.
 
2012-10-22 09:57:55 AM  
1) Lance was never hated by France, in fact he was the only cyclist to speak to the audience at the finish line in 2005.
2) NOT EVERY GT WINNER DOPED!
3) im deleting his WC on wiki win because according the UCI he is to be ignored!
 
2012-10-22 09:57:57 AM  

maddermaxx: tomWright: maddermaxx: kregh99: destrip: How can they accuse him of cheating if he never failed a doping test?

And we're done.
(not really, but we should be.)

All of the evidence is circumstantial at best. Guilt by association is not evidence. If he used, I'm all for stripping his titles. But come up with better evidence than disgruntled non-winners and "because he was around other users, he must have used" crap.

There's quite a few witnesses who were on his own cycling team who also testified against him, 11 of them apparently. These aren't a few disgruntled losers, they're his team mates, and the number of them testifying against him would make it a pretty unlikely conspiracy.

absolutely.. We all know how quantity of testimony improves its truthyness.

Just look at the inquisition, Salem witch trial, mcmartin pre-school, the billions who testify to the truth of various scriptures. All that testimony that physically impossible things happened means they did occur!

Who, precisely, would you believe then?

I mean, these people, many famous cyclists in their own right admitted to doping themselves in order to testify against Lance Armstrong. Seriously, your analogy doesn't work at all because these people aren't just saying lance did something bad, they are admitting, painfully, that they did too, and they will suffer setbacks for that themselves.


believe the tests. If they are insufficient, make better tests in the future. And do not go back and restest after someone passes using the rules in place at the time.

But like all wars on drugs, perhaps we should realize prohibition does not work, and set up a system where everyone that chooses to use these drugs can do so safely under supervision.

It might take a lot of the mythology out of it. I suspect a lot of the belief these drugs do a lot is mythology due to being a black market activity. Some work, most do not. Open information will show which work, which do not, and how safe or dangerous any are.
 
2012-10-22 09:58:36 AM  

BeesNuts: Carth: Oh no he used steroids in a sport where everyone used steroids! So officially no one won all those years since?

That is in fact their official position at the moment. Yes. It's retarded.


This is precisely why sanctioning bodies shouldn't write rules they cannot enforce.
 
2012-10-22 09:58:43 AM  

max_pooper: Here is a list of all the non-circumstantial and non-hearsay evidence against Armstrong:


So eye-witness testimony from his teammates is now circumstantial or hearsay?? I suspect you don't know what either of those words mean. If a large number of his domestiques, soigneux and assistants say "We took EPO with Lance Armstrong, and he arranged for regular testosterone, EPO and blood transfusions for us and the team", that's not circumstantial, and its not hearsay. It's eye-witness testimony. If you don't understand the difference, I hope I'm never on a jury with you.

Carth: What place do you need to go back to in Lances Tour de France wins to find someone who was still believed to be clean? Were there any in the top 10 or top 20?


It depends. Sometimes there's a probably-clean rider on the podium, sometimes you have to look in 10th place or beyond.
 
2012-10-22 09:59:18 AM  
I hope they at least let him keep his gold records.
 
2012-10-22 09:59:28 AM  

Carth: BeesNuts: Carth: Oh no he used steroids in a sport where everyone used steroids! So officially no one won all those years since?

That is in fact their official position at the moment. Yes. It's retarded.

If everyone is "cheating", couldn't we just call that "training"?

Exactly. If the goal of anti-doping rules is to create a level playing ground, but all the top athletes are doping anyways we still have a level playing ground just not the one the officials wanted.


For one thing, it wasn't a level playing ground because different teams had varying levels of access to PEDs and they were used to widely varying effectiveness based on the organization and the money available.

And the goal of anti-doping rules isn't only to create a level playing ground.
 
2012-10-22 09:59:40 AM  
275 drug tests, Zero failures.

This is an awesome day for haters and America bashers - every frog knows no American can be a champion without cheating! No evidence? No problem. We have heresay and jealousy enough to wipe out his entire career!
 
2012-10-22 10:03:09 AM  
cdn4.spiegel.deView Full Size
 
2012-10-22 10:03:17 AM  

Private_Citizen: 275 drug tests, Zero failures.

This is an awesome day for haters and America bashers - every frog knows no American can be a champion without cheating! No evidence? No problem. We have heresay and jealousy enough to wipe out his entire career!


But it is nice to know there are some great cyclist who did not need the blood or needle to win, as in Greg Lemond.
 
2012-10-22 10:03:27 AM  
There's too much money in all professional sports for any of them to stay uncorrupted for long. There's just too much incentive to cheat.

How about we stop throwing buckets of money at these over-rated, unproductive leeches? They're just playing a game, FFS.
 
2012-10-22 10:03:33 AM  
Lance Armstrong beat an entire field of dopers, seven times in a row by drinking eagle tears and wearing a red, white and blue speedo under his shorts.

His American exceptionalism allowed him to simply rise above the gallons of HGH in the field behind him.
 
2012-10-22 10:03:42 AM  
This just in: If you are sponsored by a government agency and are even suggested to have been engaged in illegal activity or any possible impropriety during that time, expect to have the hammer come down, and with a lot of money and energy being invested in said hammer.

But, yeah this all just an anti-cancer witch hunt or something.
 
2012-10-22 10:05:23 AM  

Girion47: Carth: BeesNuts: Carth: Oh no he used steroids in a sport where everyone used steroids! So officially no one won all those years since?

That is in fact their official position at the moment. Yes. It's retarded.

If everyone is "cheating", couldn't we just call that "training"?

Exactly. If the goal of anti-doping rules is to create a level playing ground, but all the top athletes are doping anyways we still have a level playing ground just not the one the officials wanted.

Yeah but who cares what enhanced people can do? I think the anti-doping measures are because we want to see what a human can do without outside help, it's inspiring. What isn't is knowing I can take a 20 to mexico and get a shortcut to athletic prowess.


Racers at this level are already spending tens to hundreds of thousands of dollars a year in training and equipment. The average cyclists who might compete in one or two races a year never has a chance to reach the level they are at. Blood transfusions and EPO might make a difference when competing with the top .01% but if they wanted a real "level playing field" normal people could compare themselves to they'd mandate what equipment and training regiments the competitors could use.
 
2012-10-22 10:05:32 AM  

maggoo: I've remember when the french cycling federation accused Lance Armstrong for using performance-enhancing drugs,...


No, you don't.

You probably remember some French newspapers accusing him, after some English/French journalists wrotea tell-all book (L.A. Confidentiel), which has been proven almost entirely true. You may even remember Lance's bullying of Christophe Bassons for his writing in "Le Parisien", but the French Cycling Federation (in common with the UCI) never did anything at all.
 
2012-10-22 10:06:11 AM  

Mose: BeesNuts: EyeballKid: Skarekrough: You missed the point though. What has Greg done for the sport of cycling lately and how does it compare to what Lance's influence has been upon it over the past decade or so?

When you're a sport nearly devoid of "rock stars" it's stupid to take one down any earlier than absolutely necessary, especially when his presence has advanced it as much as it has.

Without Greg Lemond, there's no precedent for Blackball Armstrong to become the "rock star" of his sport.

Skarekrough: Yeah, he cheated, big farking deal.


It's disturbing how prevalent this line of thinking is. Are there really this many self-centered, shiatty parents?

Explain.

What did he do to cheat? Should it be considered cheating and why? Given all he accomplished both personally and for his sport and surrounding organizations, can we establish a moral framework in which to judge him or others who "cheat" in this way?

I'm going to do a bad just at this but... if the testimony of all is teammates is to be believed he cheated by himself taking substances banned by the governing body under which he was racing and engaging in the organization of a doping program for his team. It should be considered cheating because it was against the rules of fair play, it was deceitful and manipulative, and gave an unfair edge against clean cyclists.

The moral framework is- you agree to a set of rules before competing. If you deliberately break these rules and enable, encourage and coerce others to do so while you actively avoid being caught by people trying to enforce these rules, then you are immoral.


Ignoring the tautology of the argument of why it should be considered cheating, this is a valid argument. I think that's a little too black and white for my own liking, but I can accept it as reasonable.

Now for the governing bodies complicity in the cheating that they themselves defined. Specifically the involvement of Hein Verbruggen. The dude allegedly accepted bribes from Armstrong for nearly 10 years. And at the time, was one of the most vocal opponents to the claims made by Landis in 2010. In fact, when asked about it as recently as May 2011, he said:

"There is nothing. I repeat again: Lance Armstrong has never used doping. Never, never, never. I say this not because I am a friend of his, because that is not true. I say it because I'm sure."

Meanwhile, sponsors, like Nike, were dumping money on the order of half a million dollars into the UCI expressly because of Lance's popularity and his ability to sell merchandise. Surely this would have no bearing on UCI's leadership during this period of unprecedented popularity.

/The ENTIRE ORGANIZATION from top to bottom was complicit in this. Frankly, I think the doors should be opened, the effects of steroids and HGH studied fully and the sales of these drugs brought into the light of day. Stop the use of additional illicit "masking agents" with contraindicative uses. Have team doctors monitor health and wellness (mental/physical) on people in the open.
//Same with baseball, football, soccer, swimming, sprinting, farkin.. jai alai...
 
2012-10-22 10:07:50 AM  

Killer Cars: This just in: If you are sponsored by a government agency and are even suggested to have been engaged in illegal activity or any possible impropriety during that time, expect to have the hammer come down, and with a lot of money and energy being invested in said hammer.

But, yeah this all just an anti-cancer witch hunt or something.


This is exactly why we see so many fines and prison sentences for: politicians who take illegal contributions, illegal trades in financial institutions that receive government funding and fraudulent billing from defense contractors. But really tell me how important it is to investigate cycling and baseball.
 
2012-10-22 10:07:54 AM  
*shrug* almost any professional athlete you see on television has doped at some point in their lives. If you think otherwise, you are naive. Everyone knows the deal, and everyone knows when the testing happens. You can only detect these things while they're active in your system... and its not like you need to be on it all the time. You bulk and train during the opposite season as testing occurs.

Why do you think the player unions oppose HGH testing so much? Or they agree to things like only testing in the off season.

Of course, this is any field that requires extreme physical performance. You think green berets bulk up to 240 lbs of beast, go off into the field and burn/lose 60 pounds in 3 weeks, then come back and bulk back up to their 240 weight for the text exercise a month or two later naturally too? Hah... hah.... hah....

/I'm not saying I know these things from first hand experience, but I know these things from first hand experience.
 
2012-10-22 10:08:32 AM  

Molavian: EyeballKid: 3 time Tour de France winner and former Taco Bell pitchman Greg Lemond may beg to differ.

Who?


Greg LeMond was an incredible athlete with a near-superhuman VO2Max, as well as an all-around great guy with a reputation for fairness and honesty. He won the world's most grueling sporting event three times, apparently without doping. Incidentally, one of these victories was an all-time classic moment in sporting, when he won the 1989 tour on the final day by 8 seconds (in a three-week race!)

Therefore, nobody remembers him.

Compare to douchebag extraordinaire Lance Arminjectionstrong, who not only doped (like many others at the time), but also strong-armed (eh!) some of his team-mates into doping. That is an entirely different level of douchebaggery.

Compare also to Ultimate Epic Douchebag Floyd Landis (remember him?): when LeMond was called to testify against him, Landis' manager called LeMond, in Landis' presence, and threatened to disclose the fact that LeMond had suffered sexual abuse as a kid - a fact that LeMond had revealed to Landis in confidence in a previous discussion while encouraging him to come clean.

Now Armstrong and Landis will go down in history for all the wrong reasons, and LeMond for all the right ones. Good to see that, for once, assholes didn't finish first.
 
2012-10-22 10:09:25 AM  
Armstrong stripped of Tour de France titles, Moon Landing

This headline is a real Stretch.
 
2012-10-22 10:11:02 AM  

Rev.K: Lance Armstrong beat an entire field of dopers, seven times in a row by drinking eagle tears and wearing a red, white and blue speedo under his shorts.

His American exceptionalism allowed him to simply rise above the gallons of HGH in the field behind him.


He did not, and he only raced in JULY!
 
2012-10-22 10:11:22 AM  

Private_Citizen: 275 drug tests, Zero failures.


This is the great Armstrong lie. Lance tested positive for testosterone during the Tour de France in 1999. So he created a back dated prescription for a completely fake "saddle sore" dermatitis, that the UCI accepted as justification. (Note, this isn't the Tour of Switzerland / EPO post-facto fail. This was public knowledge at the time.)

Numerous people, most - like Emma O'Reilly - with nothing to gain and everything to lose. If you want to know how Lance Armstrong operated, familiarise yourself with what happened to Emma O'Reilly.
 
2012-10-22 10:11:45 AM  
I knew there would be douche bags defending this guy. And lo and behold.....FARK.
 
2012-10-22 10:12:38 AM  

d23: maybe doping should be mandatory.


That's MrsBallou's position. She wants an All-Drug Football League. Speedballs on the sideline and not-holds-barred on the field. If somebody rips an arm off because he's in roid-rage, well, that's just too damn bad.
 
2012-10-22 10:13:37 AM  

To The Escape Zeppelin!: The medals will go to racers who's doping hasn't been caught yet.


Sounds like they're not giving ANY medals for those years...
 
2012-10-22 10:14:45 AM  
If you don't use synthetic oil in your vehicle, you're doing it wrong.

Just sayin...as the times change, so do the ways in which we manipulate efficiency. Always has been, always will be, always should be.

Yes, I'm conservative.
 
2012-10-22 10:14:55 AM  
For those who think that this should just be let go, water under the bridge and all that, think of it from a different perspective: Outing lance as a cheat is an essential part of cleaning house for the future of the sport.

If they just let it go because "it's in the past", current athletes would see that as saying "you only need to get away with it for a few years, then you're home and dry". This way the athletes will know that they will not just have to get away with it to start with, but to keep getting away with it for years to come, and if it comes out, it can ruin their reputations forever. That's a good incentive to quit doping.

Clean house for the next generation, and maybe you'll have a clean sport in the future, even if drug testing continues to lag behind new drug/masking developments.
 
2012-10-22 10:15:29 AM  

BeesNuts: Mose: BeesNuts: EyeballKid: Skarekrough: You missed the point though. What has Greg done for the sport of cycling lately and how does it compare to what Lance's influence has been upon it over the past decade or so?

When you're a sport nearly devoid of "rock stars" it's stupid to take one down any earlier than absolutely necessary, especially when his presence has advanced it as much as it has.

Without Greg Lemond, there's no precedent for Blackball Armstrong to become the "rock star" of his sport.

Skarekrough: Yeah, he cheated, big farking deal.


It's disturbing how prevalent this line of thinking is. Are there really this many self-centered, shiatty parents?

Explain.

What did he do to cheat? Should it be considered cheating and why? Given all he accomplished both personally and for his sport and surrounding organizations, can we establish a moral framework in which to judge him or others who "cheat" in this way?

I'm going to do a bad just at this but... if the testimony of all is teammates is to be believed he cheated by himself taking substances banned by the governing body under which he was racing and engaging in the organization of a doping program for his team. It should be considered cheating because it was against the rules of fair play, it was deceitful and manipulative, and gave an unfair edge against clean cyclists.

The moral framework is- you agree to a set of rules before competing. If you deliberately break these rules and enable, encourage and coerce others to do so while you actively avoid being caught by people trying to enforce these rules, then you are immoral.

Ignoring the tautology of the argument of why it should be considered cheating, this is a valid argument. I think that's a little too black and white for my own liking, but I can accept it as reasonable.

Now for the governing bodies complicity in the cheating that they themselves defined. Specifically the involvement of Hein Verbruggen. The dude allegedly accepted bribes ...


Tautologies are an engineer's best friend. Why doesn't it work? Because it's broken.

Aside from that, while I agree the UCI may very welll have been complicit and the whole dutch motorcyclist thing was just creepy, WADA and USADA was also responsible for enforcement and Armstrong agreed to compete under their rules as well. No one is going to make the argument that they are complicit, so i think that strengthens my argument.
 
2012-10-22 10:16:26 AM  
Sigh, I believed until the last moment.
I also think no one else was clean, let him keep his Jerseys
 
2012-10-22 10:16:29 AM  
i understand he passed the piss testes. But, when literally every single one of your teammates is saying 'we were all doping', it means the guy was doping.
 
2012-10-22 10:16:39 AM  

boluke01: FTA: "The agency said 20 of the 21 riders on the podium in the Tour from 1999 through 2005 have been "directly tied to likely doping through admissions, sanctions, public investigations" or other means. It added that of the 45 riders on the podium between 1996 and 2010, 36 were by cyclists "similarly tainted by doping." "

Not saying that doping is right, but after reading that, I half don't blame him. Now, the allegations about trafficking coercing people into doping should be dealt accordingly. But it almost seems silly at this point to punish willing participants in doping, when you basically had to if you were to remain competitive.

What matters now is how the UCI handles drug testing from here on out in professional cycling. If they are truly serious, they will clean house...**cue the sound of audience laughter**


Ironic how he's getting his medals stripped because he cheated, suggesting he only won because he cheated, yet he still kicked everyone else's asses and they were cheating too.
 
2012-10-22 10:16:46 AM  
I think most people here are lance fans, rather than cycling fans, which i now understand.
my point is some seem shocked and angered over this and blame others the UCI, but blame lance.
he knew the risk of getting caught , and he just lied to himself so much that he believed he was clean.
 
2012-10-22 10:17:51 AM  

destrip: How can they accuse him of cheating if he never failed a doping test?


Because he decided to stop fighting the allegations. He essentially said "no mas."

When Armstrong decided in August not to contest the agency's charges that he doped, administered doping products and encouraged doping on his Tour-winning teams, he agreed to forgo an arbitration hearing at which the evidence against him would have been aired, possibly publicly. But that evidence, which the antidoping agency called overwhelming and proof of the most sophisticated sports doping program in history, came out anyway.

He could have had a full hearing, but he chose not to.

Details here

Armstrong relied on the Italian doctor Michele Ferrari for training and doping plans, several riders said. Armstrong continued to use Ferrari even after he publicly claimed in 2004 - and testified under oath in an insurance claims case - that he had severed all business ties with Ferrari.

The antidoping agency noted that Armstrong had sent payments of more than $1 million to Ferrari from 1996 through 2006, based on financial documents discovered in an Italian doping investigation.


Lance Armstrong has now learned that if you're a prick to everyone, they'll all turn on you at the best opportunity. One person saying something 10 years ago wouldn't have been effective, but all these sworn statements together are quite damning.

One more thing - the whole "never failed a drug test" line is a lie.

The team's doctors came up with fake maladies so that riders could receive an exemption to use drugs like cortisone, several riders said. When Armstrong tested positive for cortisone during the 1999 Tour, Armstrong produced a backdated prescription for it, for saddle sores. Hamilton said he knew that was a lie.

He did test positive, and had to cover his tracks.
 
2012-10-22 10:17:58 AM  

Uchiha_Cycliste: Sigh, I believed until the last moment.
I also think no one else was clean, let him keep his Jerseys


sorry
but there were alot of clean GT winners in these decades.
 
2012-10-22 10:19:12 AM  

notatrollorami:
Overall his presence on earth has been positive because of the amount of cancer research his cause has funded. But make no mistake if you knew him personally you would consider him a huge dick.


Where are the details of how much has been given for research. IIRC the money raised was fore "awareness" and not research.
 
2012-10-22 10:19:38 AM  

gwowen: max_pooper: Here is a list of all the non-circumstantial and non-hearsay evidence against Armstrong:

So eye-witness testimony from his teammates is now circumstantial or hearsay?? I suspect you don't know what either of those words mean. If a large number of his domestiques, soigneux and assistants say "We took EPO with Lance Armstrong, and he arranged for regular testosterone, EPO and blood transfusions for us and the team", that's not circumstantial, and its not hearsay. It's eye-witness testimony. If you don't understand the difference, I hope I'm never on a jury with you.



A judge would probably laugh you out of court if that is your "evidence". I will ask again. Please cite evidence that is not circumstantial or hearsay.

Note: eyewitness testimony of "another teammate said he overheard the team doctor say Lance took HGH" is hearsay. A teammate that says, "I was on his team and I was given steroids so that means that Lance was too" is circumstantial evidence.
 
2012-10-22 10:20:03 AM  

SlothB77: i understand he passed the piss testes. But, when literally every single one of your teammates is saying 'we were all doping', it means the guy was doping.


... and yet, its astonishing how people will turn themselves inside out to deny this simple truth,
 
kab
2012-10-22 10:20:16 AM  

maddermaxx: Clean house for the next generation, and maybe you'll have a clean sport in the future,


Good luck with that. Drug testing has been going on in cycling since '65.

Alone in the Snark: Greg LeMond was an incredible athlete with a near-superhuman VO2Max, as well as an all-around great guy with a reputation for fairness and honesty. He won the world's most grueling sporting event three times, apparently without doping.


I wonder what would be found if he had gone through the same level of scrutiny that Armstrong has.
 
2012-10-22 10:20:42 AM  

max_pooper: machoprogrammer: max_pooper: Here is a list of all the non-circumstantial and non-hearsay evidence against Armstrong:

end

Do you know how I know that you don't know what those terms mean?

Why don't you enlighten us? Please provide all the evidence used against Armstrong that is not hearsay or circumstantial.


Well, for one thing, hearsay is defined as:
1. Information received from other people that cannot be adequately substantiated; rumor.
2. The report of another person's words by a witness, usually disallowed as evidence in a court of law.

Since these are people who claimed to personally witness him doping, that cannot be hearsay. If they said, "Soandso said he doped", that is hearsay.
 
2012-10-22 10:20:57 AM  

max_pooper: Please cite evidence that is not circumstantial or hearsay.


Exhibit A: 500 passed drug tests.
 
2012-10-22 10:21:11 AM  
UCI president Pat McQuaid said: "Lance Armstrong has no place in cycling. He deserves to be forgotten."
McQuaid added Armstrong had been stripped of all results since 1 August, 1998 and banned for life for doping.
 
2012-10-22 10:21:16 AM  

maddermaxx: For those who think that this should just be let go, water under the bridge and all that, think of it from a different perspective: Outing lance as a cheat is an essential part of cleaning house for the future of the sport.

If they just let it go because "it's in the past", current athletes would see that as saying "you only need to get away with it for a few years, then you're home and dry". This way the athletes will know that they will not just have to get away with it to start with, but to keep getting away with it for years to come, and if it comes out, it can ruin their reputations forever. That's a good incentive to quit doping.

Clean house for the next generation, and maybe you'll have a clean sport in the future, even if drug testing continues to lag behind new drug/masking developments.


That is why you won't ever get clean sports. Endorsement deals are paid yearly; if you cheat, win, and get a 2 million dollar a year endorsement it is worth getting your title stripped in 3-4 years. As long as there are millions of dollars on the line people will continue to dope. I'd much rather they test the participants to make sure they aren't doing something dangerous than force this stupid game of cat and mouse.
 
2012-10-22 10:21:59 AM  

maggoo: I've remember when the french cycling federation accused Lance Armstrong for using performance-enhancing drugs, a horde of americans quickly came up with a bunch of conspiracy theories and repeatedly insulted France.

Now the US anti-doping agency points out the exact same conclusions and I hear no apology being given to France and the french.


Meh. I like France, been there several times.

But, some of us are old enough to remember them being a touch smug about the LA race riots.

Didn't hear an apology from them after their Muslims torched every Renault in Paris...
 
2012-10-22 10:22:22 AM  

Uchiha_Cycliste: Sigh, I believed until the last moment.
I also think no one else was clean, let him keep his Jerseys


As I know you're a cyclist, I'm surprised you're not cynical and jaded.

/are up happy? there's no happiness in bike racing!
 
2012-10-22 10:23:06 AM  

Sybarite: Does anyone really think the guys who finished second, third, and fourth in all those races weren't doping as well?


"USADA also thinks the Tour titles should not be given to other riders who finished on the podium, such was the level of doping during Armstrong's era.

The agency said 20 of the 21 riders on the podium in the Tour from 1999 through 2005 have been "directly tied to likely doping through admissions, sanctions, public investigations" or other means. It added that of the 45 riders on the podium between 1996 and 2010, 36 were by cyclists "similarly tainted by doping.""
 
2012-10-22 10:23:43 AM  

mbillodeaux: If you don't use synthetic oil in your vehicle, you're doing it wrong.

Just sayin...as the times change, so do the ways in which we manipulate efficiency. Always has been, always will be, always should be.

Yes, I'm conservative.


Hell, I'd say you're a speechwriter for conservatives, given the way you re-phrased "cheating" to "manipulating efficiency." What did you call torture? Are you familiar with Orwell's "Politics and the English Language" essay?

Hold up, are you Frank Luntz?
 
2012-10-22 10:24:29 AM  

FinFangFark: Meh, he doped in a sport where EVERYONE dopes. He just doped better than everyone else..and the French were pissed that a dirty American won 7 straight.


This. It must have driven them nuts that a cancer survivor beat them nonstop, doping or no.
 
2012-10-22 10:24:56 AM  

Girion47: Yeah but who cares what enhanced people can do? I think the anti-doping measures are because we want to see what a human can do without outside help, it's inspiring. What isn't is knowing I can take a 20 to mexico and get a shortcut to athletic prowess.


They aren't muscle pills, you know. Like... you still need to train. As much if not more than your non-doping counterparts. What doping lets you do is *train* more strenuously and more often. And maintain a good diet.

I don't care about "outside help" any more than I care about all the other advantages afforded to professional athletes when it comes to training. I mean, back in the day, professional athletes were paid so poorly that many had additional jobs. This cut down on training time. Do we want to limit the amount of time people can spend in the gym to make sure that these records are set by Joe Everyman?
 
2012-10-22 10:25:12 AM  

Sudo_Make_Me_A_Sandwich: He's such a good guy with such a compelling story that it's such a shame he has to go out this way. He took a sport few people care about and really exploded the amount of attention that it got, and now, to find out he'd been cheating, it's such a letdown.


It's called karma.

He's been a dick for years, even to his daughter.
 
2012-10-22 10:25:40 AM  

Mose: And the goal of anti-doping rules isn't only to create a level playing ground.


Are there others? What are they?
 
2012-10-22 10:26:56 AM  
dumb headline
 
2012-10-22 10:27:02 AM  

BeesNuts: Do we want to limit the amount of time people can spend in the gym to make sure that these records are set by Joe Everyman?


Yes, also i propose no cyclist is allowed to use any bike costing over $300 to make the sport more accessible.
 
2012-10-22 10:27:31 AM  
Uhh, he still won. If everyone is doping, it's a fair race. Sports are entertainment. Why treat it any different from other aspects of entertainment? Actors/actresses modify their bodies, wear shiat tons of make-up and use cute camera tricks to present a far better depiction of themselves. Magazines photoshop the shiat out of people. The news lies. 9/11 was an insider job, WRESTLING IS REAL AND THE RENT IS TOO GOD DAMN HIGH
 
2012-10-22 10:28:07 AM  

MaudlinMutantMollusk: destrip: How can they accuse him of cheating if he never failed a doping test?

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence

/or something


Nearly failing but not quite failing every drug test he's ever taken suggests Type II error.
 
2012-10-22 10:28:43 AM  
drug tests were passed, but that doesn't matter.
what matters is that the sport is now dead
fark 'em
he shoulda been the superpresident of france!!!
 
2012-10-22 10:29:03 AM  

max_pooper: Eyewitness testimony of "another teammate said he overheard the team doctor say Lance took HGH" is hearsay. A teammate that says, "I was on his team and I was given steroids so that means that Lance was too" is circumstantial evidence.


Here's 70 seconds of an interview with Tyler Hamilton. Selected quotes from the first 40 seconds:

"We had a transfusion together, we did that multiple times"
"We took EPO together, not a big deal as we all [USPS] did it"
"I knew he took cortisone, but I never saw him do it".
"I saw him do activogene, you can get that injected the morning of a race and I saw him do that"
"I saw him take testosterone, both in pill form and in liquid form"
 
2012-10-22 10:29:45 AM  

liam76: dr_blasto: Why ban Armstrong for life, but give Floyd Landis and Contador a comparative break?

Didn't they admit it?


Landis and Contador both tested positive; Landis went on to confess all kinds of drug stuff. I'm unaware of Contador "coming clean" (lol) afterwards.

Difference is they both actually popped on tests, so confessions after the fact aren't all that don't mean so much to me.
 
2012-10-22 10:31:20 AM  

drewsclues: earthwirm: In before the Lance haters.... Oh. Too late. Everyone hates a winner.

There's a a lot of smug whining in this thread. I glad you all attribute such high morals to riding a goddam bicycle. Get over it. Winners take every advantage and bend every rule. If you you're not cheating, you're not trying. Period.


couldn't agree more
cache.deadspin.comView Full Size
 
2012-10-22 10:31:40 AM  

gwowen: max_pooper: Eyewitness testimony of "another teammate said he overheard the team doctor say Lance took HGH" is hearsay. A teammate that says, "I was on his team and I was given steroids so that means that Lance was too" is circumstantial evidence.

Here's 70 seconds of an interview with Tyler Hamilton. Selected quotes from the first 40 seconds:

"We had a transfusion together, we did that multiple times"
"We took EPO together, not a big deal as we all [USPS] did it"
"I knew he took cortisone, but I never saw him do it".
"I saw him do activogene, you can get that injected the morning of a race and I saw him do that"
"I saw him take testosterone, both in pill form and in liquid form"


I can forgive the testosterone... dude was missing a nut after all.
 
2012-10-22 10:32:14 AM  

Headso: hopefully this will reduce the number of douchebag cyclists using roads for exercise equipment and inconveniencing everyone else as they do it.


Nope. I don't know anybody in my local racing community who does it because of Lance or anyone else.

So roads are single use? Mostly to take your 6000 lbs vehicle to go buy 17 lbs worth of groceries?
 
2012-10-22 10:34:25 AM  

expobill: Uchiha_Cycliste: Sigh, I believed until the last moment.
I also think no one else was clean, let him keep his Jerseys

sorry
but there were alot of clean GT winners in these decades.


The last decade hasn't looked so hot =/
 
2012-10-22 10:35:06 AM  
Marion Jones never failed a drug test either and yet she was stripped and sent to prison.
 
2012-10-22 10:35:13 AM  

feanorn: Obama4Life: Nobody could win 7 consecutive Titles without a little outside help.

Bill Russell looks at you askance.


+1 for "askance." Now I have to work "askance" into all of my conversations today.
 
2012-10-22 10:35:14 AM  

expobill: but there were alot of clean GT winners in these decades.


There may have been some, but its hard to think of many. Armstrong, Ullrich, Riis, Heras, Pantani, Contador, Vinokurov, Basso... this is not a list that fills me with

Denis Menchov and Carlos Sastre seem likely to be the cleanest, and Simoni tested +ve for cocaine, and Simoni road for Discovery Channel
 
2012-10-22 10:36:20 AM  

BeesNuts: Mose: And the goal of anti-doping rules isn't only to create a level playing ground.

Are there others? What are they?


For the safety and health of the participants and the influence their rules have on the rest of the sport. And the fact that the way some of these products are used is illegal in a lot of the participating countries and the competitors' home countries as well.
 
2012-10-22 10:37:36 AM  

Mose: Uchiha_Cycliste: Sigh, I believed until the last moment.
I also think no one else was clean, let him keep his Jerseys

As I know you're a cyclist, I'm surprised you're not cynical and jaded.

/are up happy? there's no happiness in bike racing!


I'm slightly less happy than I was. On the other hand, he *WAS* still hands down the fastest. I'll always have those years.

I'm gonna get a beating for this...
Like a Boss.
 
2012-10-22 10:39:13 AM  
When Alberto Contador was stripped of his 2010 Tour victory for a doping violation, organizers awarded the title to Andy Schleck. In 2006, Oscar Pereiro was awarded the victory after the doping disqualification of American rider Floyd Landis.

So awards were stripped in 2006 and 2010. Is there any integrity in the sport?
 
2012-10-22 10:39:31 AM  

Girion47: kriegfusion: Obama4Life: Nobody could win 7 consecutive Titles without a little outside help.

[i129.photobucket.com image 300x300]

Unless of course the event is exactly the same or very close to the same thing over and over again.

/thinks there's too many olympic swimming events.
//Doesn't consider Phelps having more than 2 or 3 gold medals at most.

his "dope" has a downer effect, not performance enhancing.


Actually regular smokers have increased VO2max and THC is a bronchodialator, as ass-backwards as it may seem
 
2012-10-22 10:40:58 AM  

maddermaxx: Clean house for the next generation, and maybe you'll have a clean sport in the future, even if drug testing continues to lag behind new drug/masking developments.


Drug testing will always lag behind PED development; it's the nature of the beast. So long as there's money to be made, new PEDs will be developed. Some athletes will use them, some won't.
 
2012-10-22 10:41:33 AM  

Skarekrough: machoprogrammer: In before the Lance apologists

....However no one gave a crap about cycling before him and no one will likely give a crap about the sport after him.


Because, why would I now be interested in a sport whose pantheon is composed of cheaters and liars?
 
2012-10-22 10:42:12 AM  
Stupid-head Armstrong. You made me get up early to watch the mountain stages live. Thanks for ruining my sleep dopey-mcdoper.
 
2012-10-22 10:42:48 AM  
DO YOU EVEN CYCLE?
 
2012-10-22 10:45:01 AM  
This has been a good story. Like a Greek tragedy with the hero rising to great heights and then being smashed to bits on the rocks below. It was getting to be a bit of a boring narrative before all this came out.
 
2012-10-22 10:45:13 AM  

ranold: DO YOU EVEN CYCLE?


lather, rinse, repeat...?
 
2012-10-22 10:46:13 AM  

Uchiha_Cycliste: Mose: Uchiha_Cycliste: Sigh, I believed until the last moment.
I also think no one else was clean, let him keep his Jerseys

As I know you're a cyclist, I'm surprised you're not cynical and jaded.

/are up happy? there's no happiness in bike racing!

I'm slightly less happy than I was. On the other hand, he *WAS* still hands down the fastest. I'll always have those years.

I'm gonna get a beating for this...
Like a Boss.


I still hold on to the nostalgia too. Watching that first climb to Sestriere in '99 did a lot to inspire my own cycling.
 
2012-10-22 10:46:15 AM  

destrip: How can they accuse him of cheating if he never failed a doping test?


"Hitler never killed anybody" logic.

Armstrong's stance took ball, I'll give him that.
 
2012-10-22 10:46:27 AM  

ranold: DO YOU EVEN CYCLE?


Cycle on and off PEDs to avoid popping on a test?
 
2012-10-22 10:47:36 AM  

damat01: Marion Jones never failed a drug test either and yet she was stripped and sent to prison.


Jones went to prison for perjury[1]. Which, interestingly enough, is exactly what Armstrong stopped short of by choosing to quit fighting when he did. To fight on, he'd have to repeat his lie to a judge, and he knows that that escalates things from "public shame" to "jail time".

1] and cheque fraud
 
2012-10-22 10:47:39 AM  

Valiente: destrip: How can they accuse him of cheating if he never failed a doping test?

"Hitler never killed anybody" logic.

Armstrong's stance took ball, I'll give him that.


*slow clap*
 
2012-10-22 10:51:29 AM  

felching pen: Skarekrough: machoprogrammer: In before the Lance apologists

....However no one gave a crap about cycling before him and no one will likely give a crap about the sport after him.

Because, why would I now be interested in a sport whose pantheon is composed of cheaters and liars?


....that the public found out about because the governing body did everything but set themselves on fire and run through every major city to announce it.
 
2012-10-22 10:53:04 AM  

damat01: Marion Jones never failed a drug test either and yet she was stripped and sent to prison.


Giggity
 
2012-10-22 10:54:03 AM  

tomWright: damat01: Marion Jones never failed a drug test either and yet she was stripped and sent to prison.

Giggity


Oh, well played Mr Wright, well played indeed.
 
2012-10-22 10:54:44 AM  

Uchiha_Cycliste: I'm slightly less happy than I was. On the other hand, he *WAS* still hands down the fastest.


That likely wouldn't be true either if the other elite teams/cyclists had an entire team of dopers with the armstrong-uci inside connection/advanced undetectable doping techniques. The rest of the world wasn't in on the microdosing train, have advanced warning for tests, or were saddled with at least a few clean riders or riders who couldn't dose daily like armstrong's team. They were just winging it - of course they couldn't keep up.
 
2012-10-22 10:56:32 AM  
UCI president Pat McQuaid announced that the federation accepted the USADA's report on Armstrong and would not appeal to the Court of Arbitration for Sport.

I knew Lance didn't have the balls to appeal.
 
ifq
2012-10-22 10:56:36 AM  
not that strong finally...
 
2012-10-22 10:57:02 AM  

Tyrone Slothrop: drewsclues: lohphat: drewsclues: earthwirm: In before the Lance haters.... Oh. Too late. Everyone hates a winner.

There's a a lot of smug whining in this thread. I glad you all attribute such high morals to riding a goddam bicycle. Get over it. Winners take every advantage and bend every rule. If you you're not cheating, you're not trying. Period.

You sound Conservative.

Liberal as they come. I just don't think sports matter enough in the world to get all pissed when someone bends to rules to their advantage. Don't want to get pissed when people make money off cheating at sports? Stop paying billions to the people that play the games. Simple as that.

And yet your attitude describes the Republican platform perfectly.


And yours describes the Democrat platform; whining rather than doing.
 
2012-10-22 11:00:47 AM  
Are the people asking for their money back from Livestrong trying to one-up Lance as the the biggest scumbags in the world. They are asking for their money back... from a cancer charity.

Besides whose stronger than somebody all tuned up on PEDs?
 
2012-10-22 11:00:50 AM  
He didn't cheat, he changed the conditions of the race. He deserves an accommodation for original thinking.

edgeofthewest.files.wordpress.comView Full Size
 
2012-10-22 11:04:44 AM  

gwowen: expobill: but there were alot of clean GT winners in these decades.

There may have been some, but its hard to think of many. Armstrong, Ullrich, Riis, Heras, Pantani, Contador, Vinokurov, Basso... this is not a list that fills me with

Denis Menchov and Carlos Sastre seem likely to be the cleanest, and Simoni tested +ve for cocaine, and Simoni road for Discovery Channel


Im thinking of my club since I been following the sport since the 70's and a huge banesto-movistar supporter were we won a total of 12 GT and numerous races CLEAN!
 
2012-10-22 11:06:58 AM  

lohphat: Don't you tools still feel smug wearing those sheep tags...er, Livestrong[tm] bracelets? You know, for "cancer awareness" that gave nothing to research but mostly into his pocket?

P. T. Barnum wins again.


[Citation Needed]
 
2012-10-22 11:07:17 AM  

Carth: Oh no he used steroids in a sport where everyone used steroids! So officially no one won all those years since?


Óscar Pereiro of Caisse d'Epargne-Illes Balears won the TDF 2006
 
2012-10-22 11:08:06 AM  

Uranus Is Huge!: Are the people asking for their money back from Livestrong trying to one-up Lance as the the biggest scumbags in the world. They are asking for their money back... from a cancer charity.

Besides whose stronger than somebody all tuned up on PEDs?


I never gave them a dime!
/hates cancer tho!
 
2012-10-22 11:08:14 AM  
civil lawsuits from ex-sponsors or even the U.S. government.

Let see, he rode for the US Postal Service. Who's going broke right about now? Oh, the US Postal Service?
 
2012-10-22 11:10:22 AM  

Sudo_Make_Me_A_Sandwich: He's such a good guy with such a compelling story that it's such a shame he has to go out this way. He took a sport few people care about and really exploded the amount of attention that it got, and now, to find out he'd been cheating, it's such a letdown.


Good guy... who left his wife who stood by him through cancer, and the mother of his children, for freaking Cheryl Crow?
Not so much.

lohphat: Don't you tools still feel smug wearing those sheep tags...er, Livestrong[tm] bracelets? You know, for "cancer awareness" that gave nothing to research but mostly into his pocket?

P. T. Barnum wins again.


Just in case no one has already given you a great big STFU you liar: https://www.charitynavigator.org/index.cfm?bay=search.summary&orgid=6 5 70
 
2012-10-22 11:10:59 AM  
I still do not forgive the UCI for banning Alejandro Valverde, but today was great for the sport of cycling!
 
2012-10-22 11:11:56 AM  

expobill: Im thinking of my club since I been following the sport since the 70's and a huge banesto-movistar supporter were we won a total of 12 GT and numerous races CLEAN!


Oh, OK. That's fair enough.

I was limiting myself to post-Indurain (i.e. before USPS, Festina, EPO etc took the doping to the industrial level). Up to and including Indurain, whatever doping was going on in the peloton was relatively small scale (think Tom Simpson, rather than Marco Pantani).
 
2012-10-22 11:13:01 AM  

rumpelstiltskin: Sybarite: Does anyone really think the guys who finished second, third, and fourth in all those races weren't doping as well?

Most of those guys have already been caught. One of the problems with stripping him of his titles is, who do you give them to?

 

Well, ladies and gentlemen, I don't think any of our Tour de France contestants have succeeded in passing the doping test, so I say we award the first prize to the girl with the biggest tits. 

/Proust
 
2012-10-22 11:13:08 AM  

destrip: How can they accuse him of cheating if he never failed a doping test?


Because that's what he was cheating on. Testimony of his teammates.
 
2012-10-22 11:14:15 AM  
So THIS is how France gets back at us for all that "freedom fries" nonsense.
 
2012-10-22 11:14:48 AM  

waterrockets: Headso: hopefully this will reduce the number of douchebag cyclists using roads for exercise equipment and inconveniencing everyone else as they do it.

Nope. I don't know anybody in my local racing community who does it because of Lance or anyone else.

So roads are single use? Mostly to take your 6000 lbs vehicle to go buy 17 lbs worth of groceries?


So cyclists are delusional as well.

You're hobby is fundamentally disruptive to your community. Which is fine, so long as you're aware of it and adjust your behavior appropriately. Commandeering shoulderless, windy roads for 4 - 6 hours a week isn't appropriate. Especially in the region I live in, because trail riding is abundant as all get out.

If you believe that Lance Armstrong didn't increase the popularity of street cycling in America... you're completely insane.
 
2012-10-22 11:15:23 AM  

EyeballKid: Skarekrough: However no one gave a crap about cycling before him and no one will likely give a crap about the sport after him.

[startwithtypewriters.com image 298x449]
3 time Tour de France winner and former Taco Bell pitchman Greg Lemond may beg to differ. Just because you yourself don't remember something doesn't mean it didn't hapen.


Which has really little do with that guy's comment. Cycling is a niche sport and the only reason it got any sort of public attention outside of it's narrow fan base is because of Lance Armstrong. Without a more or less iconic champion, cycling will fade back into obscurity.

You're not wrong, either.
 
2012-10-22 11:16:26 AM  
ecx.images-amazon.comView Full Size
 
2012-10-22 11:18:28 AM  

expobill: Carth: Oh no he used steroids in a sport where everyone used steroids! So officially no one won all those years since?

Óscar Pereiro of Caisse d'Epargne-Illes Balears won the TDF 2006


And he has already had one doping allegation which he explained away as asthma medication. I bet if we spend a few million dollars investigating him we could turn up something else.
 
2012-10-22 11:18:48 AM  

SirGeorgeBurkelwitzIII: And he still won 7 in a row, He was still the best.

Even if he was clean he would never be the best because he only competed and trained for the TDF.
a true champion cyclist can win the Giro, Vuelta or TDF that year.
Lance never raced in those tours one year.
but Pat McQuaid told us cycling fans to forget that person.
so I will- he never existed!
Happy riding everyone, and visit my Movistar team cycling blog (which needs updating) to stay in touch!
 
2012-10-22 11:21:41 AM  

Carth: expobill: Carth: Oh no he used steroids in a sport where everyone used steroids! So officially no one won all those years since?

Óscar Pereiro of Caisse d'Epargne-Illes Balears won the TDF 2006

And he has already had one doping allegation which he explained away as asthma medication. I bet if we spend a few million dollars investigating him we could turn up something else.


wrong rider, that was Indurain who was clear because due to asthma.
And Miguel suffered from allergies and never took anything for them, which explains his dismal Vuelta results.
 
2012-10-22 11:24:32 AM  
Given how physically fit he was/is, like Lewis Black said, the question isn't was he doping, the question is why aren't we all doping.
 
2012-10-22 11:25:43 AM  

Some Bass Playing Guy: E

Which has really little do with that guy's comment. Cycling is a niche sport and the only reason it got any sort of public attention outside of it's narrow fan base is because of Lance Armstrong. Without a more or less iconic champion, cycling will fade back into obscurity.


sez who?
i know the sport will and has succeed with record amounts of spectators this year, even with the winter conditions Spain that cancelled some routes last March.
 
2012-10-22 11:29:40 AM  

expobill: Carth: expobill: Carth: Oh no he used steroids in a sport where everyone used steroids! So officially no one won all those years since?

Óscar Pereiro of Caisse d'Epargne-Illes Balears won the TDF 2006

And he has already had one doping allegation which he explained away as asthma medication. I bet if we spend a few million dollars investigating him we could turn up something else.

wrong rider, that was Indurain who was clear because due to asthma.
And Miguel suffered from allergies and never took anything for them, which explains his dismal Vuelta results.


Sorry this was the first thing that came up when I added his name to dopingLink?
 
2012-10-22 11:30:03 AM  
Wow, if this is what happens when you're merely ACCUSED of doping, what do they do to you when they find that you're actually doping?

If you come in second place in the race, I guess your best strategy is to accuse the winner of taking drugs. No need to actually win anymore...
 
2012-10-22 11:30:36 AM  

Mose: BeesNuts: Mose: And the goal of anti-doping rules isn't only to create a level playing ground.

Are there others? What are they?

For the safety and health of the participants and the influence their rules have on the rest of the sport. And the fact that the way some of these products are used is illegal in a lot of the participating countries and the competitors' home countries as well.


In the NFL it's an expectation that you will break bones, be concussed, tear ligaments... In boxing, you will develop brain damage. In Hockey you will lose teeth. In power lifting you will dislocate something or other. It is for these risks and for the value of the overall organization that they are so heavily compensated (in most professional sports anyway).

Some of these drugs can reduce the risk of injury. Some can increase the risk of heart disease. Keeping it below board certainly doesn't help these athletes make informed decisions. By creating a blanket prohibition on all PEDs, they have conceived an environment in which the legality of the drugs plays only a small role in an athletes decision to use them. Now, the only drugs they are willing or able to take are the ones that are most easily passed through the system, masked by additional (and potentially *more* dangerous) drugs, or so new that no test exists to detect it yet. Wouldn't it be nice if these athletes were sticking to the safest available performance enhancers? And those who didn't wish to subject their bodies to punishment would simply (as is the case already) choose to not participate?
 
2012-10-22 11:30:51 AM  

Zizzowop: Given how physically fit he was/is, like Lewis Black said, the question isn't was he doping, the question is why aren't we all doping.


why should we? all riders do have a conscious , well the ones i support!
 
2012-10-22 11:31:08 AM  

drewsclues: If you you're not cheating, you're not trying. Period.


what a sad commentary on, well, you.
 
2012-10-22 11:34:17 AM  

Zizzowop: Given how physically fit he was/is, like Lewis Black said, the question isn't was he doping, the question is why aren't we all doping.


With EPO - good luck. Some supremely fit cyclists have died in their sleep while trying to pump the old catchup blood. I know what you are saying, 'just take blood thinners!'. Well, there's the guy who bled out from a miinor injury from taking to many blood thinners to counter the EPO.

At any rate, yeah, EPO can increase you athletic performance if you train properly... but it's dangerous shiat. I for one, do not like the idea of sleeping with a heart monitor to wake me up if it slows down too much so I can hop on an exercise bike to get it going again.

In the words of one guy...

"During the day we live to ride, and at night, we ride to stay alive"

Sounds like great fun, no?
 
2012-10-22 11:34:58 AM  
So, I'm wondering when someone will finally go after Barry Bonds-I have that dude's rookie baseball card, and it's obvious looking at then and like 5 years later that he changed quite a bit.
 
2012-10-22 11:36:12 AM  

Carth:

Sorry this was the first thing that came up when I added his name to dopingLink?


No problem, this is my favorite sport so i kinda know these things more that myself.
I also blogged a team from Spain.

The sport is exciting, heartbreaking and sad, we lost a great friendly rider Xavier Tondo last year to an accident involving a garage door, and a very funny Wouters to a wall. Just watching a handful of riders race up a incline to the finish line and have your facebook friend win, is very incredible!
 
kab
2012-10-22 11:36:22 AM  

expobill: Carth: expobill: Carth: Oh no he used steroids in a sport where everyone used steroids! So officially no one won all those years since?

Óscar Pereiro of Caisse d'Epargne-Illes Balears won the TDF 2006

And he has already had one doping allegation which he explained away as asthma medication. I bet if we spend a few million dollars investigating him we could turn up something else.

wrong rider, that was Indurain who was clear because due to asthma.
And Miguel suffered from allergies and never took anything for them, which explains his dismal Vuelta results.


Actually both Oscar and Miguel tested positive for salbutamol (in '06 and '94, respectively)
 
2012-10-22 11:37:38 AM  

godxam: drewsclues: If you you're not cheating, you're not trying. Period.

what a sad commentary on, well, you.


If there's something you love to do and you want to be the best at it you do whatever it takes to get what you want. This does not mean always cheating to get ahead. There are plenty of places where playing by the rules can get you to the top. In most sports, cheating is almost a requirement to win. If you don't like it, stop paying to see them play.
 
2012-10-22 11:37:39 AM  
Pretty poor understanding of hearsay and circumstantial evidence in here.

Circumstantial evidence is admissible and usually the bulk of the evidence used in courts. Probably 95% of cases are entirely circumstantial. The comments in here are a result of the CSI Effect, where people who watch too much TV, and haven't set a foot in a criminal courtroom think that no one is convicted unless there's DNA or other hard direct slam-dunk type evidence proving guilt.

Plenty, if not the majority of people on death row where the only evidence against them was circumstantial.

Hearsay involves one person saying that another person said something. All of the riders who testify that they witnessed Lance dope would not be giving hearsay evidence. Hearsay would only be where someone testifies that Lance admitted that he doped to them privately.

/the more you know 
//You haven't won the race if in winning the race you have lost the respect of your competitors.
 
kab
2012-10-22 11:38:12 AM  

BeesNuts: You're hobby is fundamentally disruptive to your community.


Your assessment of what is and is not legal road use is off base, unsurprisingly.

You'll get over it.
 
2012-10-22 11:39:03 AM  

expobill: why should we? all riders do have a conscious , well the ones i support!


My question to all the 'so what?' brigade is this: If every rider in all the big races was clean, wouldn't someone still finish first? It's like people have become brainwashed and they no longer think it's possible to ride the grand tours without drugs.

Of course it's possible and many have done it. The problem is it doesn't fit the american corporate narrative. To sell product you need a dominant superstar to build around. Not a different guy with a funny name winning all the different various races.
 
2012-10-22 11:39:22 AM  

kingflower: Looks like it is going to take a little bit longer for the naive and gullible Lance apologists to finally understand that their fake hero is a pathological liar, a bully, and a piece of shiat who tried to destroy anyone who got in the way of his carefully constructed one-ball liestrong universe.


Did you fall off your bike in the race, honey?
 
2012-10-22 11:41:18 AM  

drewsclues: And yet your attitude describes the Republican platform perfectly.

And yours describes the Democrat platform; whining rather than doing.


I'd rather have a Democratic party that whines about lying and cheating instead of the GOP which embraces those values wholeheartedly.
 
2012-10-22 11:41:25 AM  

JohnBigBootay: Zizzowop: Given how physically fit he was/is, like Lewis Black said, the question isn't was he doping, the question is why aren't we all doping.

With EPO - good luck. Some supremely fit cyclists have died in their sleep while trying to pump the old catchup blood. I know what you are saying, 'just take blood thinners!'. Well, there's the guy who bled out from a miinor injury from taking to many blood thinners to counter the EPO.

At any rate, yeah, EPO can increase you athletic performance if you train properly... but it's dangerous shiat. I for one, do not like the idea of sleeping with a heart monitor to wake me up if it slows down too much so I can hop on an exercise bike to get it going again.

In the words of one guy...

"During the day we live to ride, and at night, we ride to stay alive"

Sounds like great fun, no?


I was just quoting Lewis Black, the only drugs I take are Prilosec. I ride a bike roughly 5 or 6 miles every day, although I may need to alter that with the change in weather, luckily I live in CA though.
 
2012-10-22 11:43:42 AM  

JohnBigBootay: expobill: why should we? all riders do have a conscious , well the ones i support!

My question to all the 'so what?' brigade is this: If every rider in all the big races was clean, wouldn't someone still finish first? It's like people have become brainwashed and they no longer think it's possible to ride the grand tours without drugs.

Of course it's possible and many have done it. The problem is it doesn't fit the american corporate narrative. To sell product you need a dominant superstar to build around. Not a different guy with a funny name winning all the different various races.


Ding Ding Ding

/We have a winner here
 
2012-10-22 11:43:50 AM  
I'll just leave this here.

Link 

NSFW language.
 
2012-10-22 11:47:35 AM  
Actually both Oscar and Miguel tested positive for salbutamol (in '06 and '94, respectively)


Salbutamol is commonly used to treat asthma symptoms, and is allowed to be used in cycle racing if the cyclist can provide a medical prescription for the substance. which both did before the tour.
 
2012-10-22 11:49:08 AM  
Does this mean I can now drive in the bike lane? No?

Then, fark it.
 
2012-10-22 11:53:43 AM  

lohphat: drewsclues: And yet your attitude describes the Republican platform perfectly.

And yours describes the Democrat platform; whining rather than doing.

I'd rather have a Democratic party that whines about lying and cheating instead of the GOP which embraces those values wholeheartedly.


Then Democrats will always find a way to lose. Just like they've always done.

If you're talking about the future of our country. fark morality. Place yourself in a position to do what you think is best. That's the Republican platform. Democrats could be served well by embracing some of it.
 
2012-10-22 11:56:10 AM  

Leonard Washington:
Plenty, if not the majority of people on death row where the only evidence against them was circumstantial.
.


Sounds to me like that's a problem rather than a good thing.

There's still no actual evidence Lance cheated, and it took over a decade for a body with a grudge against him to round up a bunch of other jealous known liars and cheaters, and then ask them to give conflicting "evidence" against him. Anybody who willingly believes this stuff should go back to elementary school and pick up a critical thinking book.
 
2012-10-22 11:56:25 AM  

drewsclues: Tyrone Slothrop: drewsclues: lohphat: drewsclues: earthwirm: In before the Lance haters.... Oh. Too late. Everyone hates a winner.

There's a a lot of smug whining in this thread. I glad you all attribute such high morals to riding a goddam bicycle. Get over it. Winners take every advantage and bend every rule. If you you're not cheating, you're not trying. Period.

You sound Conservative.

Liberal as they come. I just don't think sports matter enough in the world to get all pissed when someone bends to rules to their advantage. Don't want to get pissed when people make money off cheating at sports? Stop paying billions to the people that play the games. Simple as that.

And yet your attitude describes the Republican platform perfectly.

And yours describes the Democrat platform; whining rather than doing.


It's hilarious that you think the position, "people shouldn't cheat" is whining. Sorry about the shiatty parents and role models you had.
 
2012-10-22 11:57:04 AM  
Sure he was doping. And he beat a bunch of other guys that were doping. Just like Barry Bonds and Mark McGuire. They're grownups. What they inject into their bodies is their business, not mine. And if they do it for my entertainment, so much the better. These people are million dollar guinnea pigs. Using chemicals to make yourself better isn't unethical. The question is how to do it safely, and that's where the pro athletes come in. Pay them lots of money to test this stuff out so that when I'm 50, I can be as strong as I was when I was 24, and so I can do it safely. Let 'em dope, but give us full disclosure so we can learn something.
 
2012-10-22 11:58:58 AM  

Sargun: Leonard Washington:
Plenty, if not the majority of people on death row where the only evidence against them was circumstantial.
.

Sounds to me like that's a problem rather than a good thing.

There's still no actual evidence Lance cheated, and it took over a decade for a body with a grudge against him to round up a bunch of other jealous known liars and cheaters, and then ask them to give conflicting "evidence" against him. Anybody who willingly believes this stuff should go back to elementary school and pick up a critical thinking book.


meh...sports Luddites win in the rules committees, not on the field.
 
2012-10-22 11:58:59 AM  

drewsclues: lohphat: drewsclues: And yet your attitude describes the Republican platform perfectly.

And yours describes the Democrat platform; whining rather than doing.

I'd rather have a Democratic party that whines about lying and cheating instead of the GOP which embraces those values wholeheartedly.

Then Democrats will always find a way to lose. Just like they've always done.

If you're talking about the future of our country. fark morality. Place yourself in a position to do what you think is best. That's the Republican platform. Democrats could be served well by embracing some of it.


Clearly that's why you and your ilk are part of the problem.

"Christian family values for everyone -- except us."

Fark that hypocritical noise.
 
2012-10-22 11:59:22 AM  

browntimmy: drewsclues: Tyrone Slothrop: drewsclues: lohphat: drewsclues: earthwirm: In before the Lance haters.... Oh. Too late. Everyone hates a winner.

There's a a lot of smug whining in this thread. I glad you all attribute such high morals to riding a goddam bicycle. Get over it. Winners take every advantage and bend every rule. If you you're not cheating, you're not trying. Period.

You sound Conservative.

Liberal as they come. I just don't think sports matter enough in the world to get all pissed when someone bends to rules to their advantage. Don't want to get pissed when people make money off cheating at sports? Stop paying billions to the people that play the games. Simple as that.

And yet your attitude describes the Republican platform perfectly.

And yours describes the Democrat platform; whining rather than doing.

It's hilarious that you think the position, "people shouldn't cheat" is whining. Sorry about the shiatty parents and role models you had.


Unless they are cheating the immigration system, welfare, elections, ect... you know... the shiat that actually matters then its ok to right?
 
2012-10-22 12:01:08 PM  
Johny Schleck advises sons to "quit cycling"
That is a shame, I hope they do not because they are fun riders to watch!
 
2012-10-22 12:02:02 PM  

EyeballKid: mbillodeaux: If you don't use synthetic oil in your vehicle, you're doing it wrong.

Just sayin...as the times change, so do the ways in which we manipulate efficiency. Always has been, always will be, always should be.

Yes, I'm conservative.

Hell, I'd say you're a speechwriter for conservatives, given the way you re-phrased "cheating" to "manipulating efficiency." What did you call torture? Are you familiar with Orwell's "Politics and the English Language" essay?

Hold up, are you Frank Luntz?


LOL...no. Not familiar with it; but, will read it. Thank you for the reference! A link would be much more efficient for my current mood.

Yes. I like semantics. ;-)
 
2012-10-22 12:02:28 PM  

lohphat: Don't you tools still feel smug wearing those sheep tags...er, Livestrong[tm] bracelets? You know, for "cancer awareness" that gave nothing to research but mostly into his pocket?


They make a good c*ck ring.  So, yah, they feel snug.
 
2012-10-22 12:02:29 PM