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 108
    More: News, Tour de France, UCI, Court of Arbitration for Sport, Johan Bruyneel, Contador, Andy Schleck, Floyd Landis, Pat McQuaid  
•       •       •

7321 clicks; posted to Sports » on 22 Oct 2012 at 8:44 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Archived thread
2012-10-22 08:45:50 AM  
9 votes:
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 08:46:31 AM  
7 votes:
How can they accuse him of cheating if he never failed a doping test?
2012-10-22 09:09:43 AM  
6 votes:

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
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 08:47:28 AM  
5 votes:
The medals will go to racers who's doping hasn't been caught yet.
2012-10-22 08:47:24 AM  
5 votes:
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 08:57:36 AM  
4 votes:
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 08:45:12 AM  
4 votes:
Now I can finally say I've won as many Tour de France races as Lance Armstrong
2012-10-22 09:33:04 AM  
3 votes:

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 08:58:16 AM  
3 votes:

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 08:50:53 AM  
3 votes:

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


Bill Russell looks at you askance.
2012-10-22 08:50:26 AM  
3 votes:

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 08:49:33 AM  
3 votes:
Does anyone really think the guys who finished second, third, and fourth in all those races weren't doping as well?
2012-10-22 08:48:45 AM  
3 votes:
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 08:47:47 AM  
3 votes:
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 04:21:05 PM  
2 votes:

DeathCipris: I stand corrected. The evidence presented against him are testimonies from ex-butthurt teammates and people that didn't win along with some hearsay for good measure (see issue with Dr. Ferrari). The federal government dropped the case due to lack of evidence. Plain and simple. They encountered no evidence that would be admissible in a formal court of law for blood doping/illegal substances; thus, closed the book.
I have read through most of the massive "reasoned decision" that the USADA issued and most of the evidence contained therein is ludicrous. Here is a gem straight from the report: "Jonathan Vaughters also believed Armstrong was likely using EPO-there were some tell tale signs, such as Lance carrying around a thermos."
Really? A thermos...that's a piece of evidence you are using to strip a lifetime of achievements away from a man and ruin him? Because he was carrying a thermos and you ASSUMED he is using EPO.
This isn't evidence. This is just people pointing fingers with nothing real to fall back on other than "I saw him...XYZ" Some of their evidence doesn't even match up (see also iss ...


You Lance fanboys are so sad to watch. The cognitive dissonance is just oozing from your pores. To take the direct testimony of 26 people and boil it down to one sentence about a thermos is so desperately pathetic and devoid of logic. Would you like me to post the massive metric fark ton of statements

These were his farking teammates and support staff. What did they have to be butt-hurt about? Their farking job was to see to it that Lance Armstrong won those TdFs. You obviously don't understand cycling if you think that his teammates were "butthurt" about not being able to "beat" Lance. Their job was never to beat Lance. It was to be his support. Cycling is a team sport. Why would his personal masseuse be "butt hurt"? Why would his farking BEST FRIEND, George Hincapie, (who never tested positive either, BTW) admit to doping himself and sign an affidavit saying that he saw Lance get blood transfusions and talked about doping with him? Why? For what purpose?

Finally, you simply don't understand what hearsay means. Hearsay is "I heard from so and so that Lance Armstrong did this." Hearsay is not "I farkING saw him do it with my own two eyes." That's direct witness testimony, and that's what is contained in those 26 (twenty farking six) sworn affidavits.
2012-10-22 03:27:23 PM  
2 votes:
Cycling is doing everything they can to compete with boxing for "least relevant sport in America."
2012-10-22 12:41:42 PM  
2 votes:
LOl, all this to do about guys riding bicycles.
2012-10-22 12:21:34 PM  
2 votes:
And while I'm at it, if you think you are saving gas and the planet by riding your bike to work if you are making every car that goes by you put their brakes on to avoid hitting your retarded ass then you are not saving the planet, you are probably causing more gasoline to be used than if you just drove a hummer to work.
2012-10-22 10:21:16 AM  
2 votes:

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 10:19:12 AM  
2 votes:

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 10:17:51 AM  
2 votes:

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 10:03:42 AM  
2 votes:
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 09:10:07 AM  
2 votes:

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 09:07:39 AM  
2 votes:
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 09:07:13 AM  
2 votes:

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 09:04:22 AM  
2 votes:

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 09:02:30 AM  
2 votes:

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 09:00:53 AM  
2 votes:
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 08:58:38 AM  
2 votes:

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 08:56:54 AM  
2 votes:
LOL. Only two of the top ten finishers in 2003 didn't get busted.
2012-10-22 08:55:44 AM  
2 votes:
In before the Lance haters.... Oh. Too late. Everyone hates a winner.
2012-10-22 08:54:20 AM  
2 votes:

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 08:54:19 AM  
2 votes:
At least he still has The Ocho.
2012-10-22 08:52:35 AM  
2 votes:

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 08:52:22 AM  
2 votes:
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 08:51:57 AM  
2 votes:

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 08:51:11 AM  
2 votes:

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 08:50:58 AM  
2 votes:
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 08:50:48 AM  
2 votes:

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 08:49:07 AM  
2 votes:

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 08:45:19 AM  
2 votes:
Nobody could win 7 consecutive Titles without a little outside help.
2012-10-22 04:26:44 PM  
1 votes:

DeathCipris: I would also like to add the people that testified against Lance (yes his ex-teammates), were caught and given a reduced sentence for selling someone else out...even if it wasn't true. These people had motive to name Lance, someone winning big and already the target of allegations, to save their own asses.


a) Unfortnuately for you and the other Lance fanboys, Armstrong was declared cancer free in Feb. 1997. He didn't win his first TdF until two years later. EPO stays in your bloodstream for about 5-6 hours.

b) Of the 26 who testified, only 11 were former teammates. Of those 11, 6 of them had ever tested positive IN THE PAST. They had already been punished. USADA had nothing at all on 5 of these guys - including George Hincapie - Armstrong's best friend who Armstrong himself has referred to as a "brother". Hincapie had never failed a test. And what of the other 15 people who aren't even athletes? People like Armstrong's masseuse? What did she stand to gain from this? They can't punish a farking massesuse for anything...
2012-10-22 04:15:10 PM  
1 votes:
I would also like to add the people that testified against Lance (yes his ex-teammates), were caught and given a reduced sentence for selling someone else out...even if it wasn't true. These people had motive to name Lance, someone winning big and already the target of allegations, to save their own asses.
2012-10-22 04:08:43 PM  
1 votes:

steve_wmn: DeathCipris: Alright, is it just me or is ALL of this evidence against him hearsay? By people that didn't win and former butthurt teammates no less...
The evidence was so scant in fact, that federal prosecutors DROPPED the case against him due to lack of evidence.

Hearsay is when someone tells you they did something, or even worse, someone else tells you that he did something. What we have here is direct eye witness testimony, from people that saw Lance take drugs or were ordered to take drugs by Lance and Johann Bruyneel. The federal case was dropped because doping is not a federal crime in the US. The worst they were going to get him on was defrauding the Postal Service or something like that. Small potatoes for the Justice Department that still hasn't prosecuted anyone for the mortgage backed securities and derivatives fraud that brought the world economy down.


I stand corrected. The evidence presented against him are testimonies from ex-butthurt teammates and people that didn't win along with some hearsay for good measure (see issue with Dr. Ferrari). The federal government dropped the case due to lack of evidence. Plain and simple. They encountered no evidence that would be admissible in a formal court of law for blood doping/illegal substances; thus, closed the book.
I have read through most of the massive "reasoned decision" that the USADA issued and most of the evidence contained therein is ludicrous. Here is a gem straight from the report: "Jonathan Vaughters also believed Armstrong was likely using EPO-there were some tell tale signs, such as Lance carrying around a thermos."
Really? A thermos...that's a piece of evidence you are using to strip a lifetime of achievements away from a man and ruin him? Because he was carrying a thermos and you ASSUMED he is using EPO.
This isn't evidence. This is just people pointing fingers with nothing real to fall back on other than "I saw him...XYZ" Some of their evidence doesn't even match up (see also issue with 2001 race).
I think the man has done a lot of wonderful things in his life and is an inspiration to many people. Now I do hold an appreciation for Lance, but I am still objective and the evidence (or lack thereof) does not point to anything concrete and the people telling the stories have a motive. The situation reeks of politics and people that just want to "get back" at Lance.

Sources:
http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/sports/!invesitgations%20and%20enterp ri se%20docs/armstrong-reasoned-decision.pdf
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lance_armstrong#cite_note-61 (I hate using Wikipedia but the damn LA Times article it referenced is broken)


/Can't help but think of a doctor that works on Ferrari's
//VROOM!!
2012-10-22 03:50:06 PM  
1 votes:

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.


never heard of him even though I do watch TV, including alot of sports, and thats the point. The only pro-cyclist I could ever name was Lance Armstrong and now they destroyed him for something everyone else was doing too. It would be like diving trying to destroy Phelps.

Seriously cycling took out a gun and shot it's own foot when they decided to tear down Lance.
2012-10-22 02:35:14 PM  
1 votes:

rka: So I guess the million dollar question is...was it worth it?

If someone had come to me back in the mid-90s, where I was a pretty good, but not particularly memorable or notable rider and when I was battling cancer and said "You can have 13-14 years as the King of the World, raise millions for charity, basically be the Big Man on Campus. Meet Presidents and CEOs, have unprecedented influence and power...but the downside is you have to cheat and when you're found out you'll be disgraced"....would I take it?


Christophe Bassons would have said, 'non, I still have to look at myself in the mirror don't I?"

We know what high-functioning sociopath Lance Armstrong said. Dude sends threatening text messages to other riders' wives and sleeps like a baby. Some people just don't have a conscience.

Then you have lots of guys in the middle - like Hincapie. He made the same choice - he cheated. But I think it bugged the hell out of him and when faced with a subpoena he couldn't lie anymore. Armstrong would have carried the secret to his grave with no doubts whatsoever.
2012-10-22 12:54:05 PM  
1 votes:
Never trust a bicyclist
2012-10-22 12:51:55 PM  
1 votes:
Alright, is it just me or is ALL of this evidence against him hearsay? By people that didn't win and former butthurt teammates no less...
The evidence was so scant in fact, that federal prosecutors DROPPED the case against him due to lack of evidence.
2012-10-22 12:04:53 PM  
1 votes:

Joe Blowme: Unless they are cheating the immigration system, welfare, elections, ect... you know... the shiat that actually matters then its ok to right?


You're including the employers that willingly and knowingly hire undocumented workers to protect their profits right? Do you think those people are working in crappy slave conditions because they want to?

Want to solve the immigration problem? Jail a few agribusiness and construction CEOs and seize their assets for hiring undocumented workers. They're creating the employment market drawing them here.
2012-10-22 11:56:25 AM  
1 votes:

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 11:41:18 AM  
1 votes:

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 11:37:39 AM  
1 votes:
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 11:36:22 AM  
1 votes:

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 11:34:17 AM  
1 votes:

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 11:31:08 AM  
1 votes:

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


what a sad commentary on, well, you.
2012-10-22 11:16:26 AM  
1 votes:
ecx.images-amazon.com
2012-10-22 10:54:44 AM  
1 votes:

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 10:39:31 AM  
1 votes:

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 10:35:06 AM  
1 votes:
Marion Jones never failed a drug test either and yet she was stripped and sent to prison.
2012-10-22 10:34:25 AM  
1 votes:

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 10:29:03 AM  
1 votes:

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 10:28:07 AM  
1 votes:

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 10:26:56 AM  
1 votes:
dumb headline
2012-10-22 10:25:12 AM  
1 votes:

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 10:23:06 AM  
1 votes:

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 10:20:57 AM  
1 votes:

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


Exhibit A: 500 passed drug tests.
2012-10-22 10:20:42 AM  
1 votes:

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.
kab
2012-10-22 10:20:16 AM  
1 votes:

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 10:14:55 AM  
1 votes:
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 10:11:22 AM  
1 votes:

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 10:08:32 AM  
1 votes:

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 10:05:32 AM  
1 votes:

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 10:03:33 AM  
1 votes:
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 10:03:27 AM  
1 votes:
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 09:58:43 AM  
1 votes:

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 09:57:38 AM  
1 votes:
RCA tried to take his patents about FM from him.

upload.wikimedia.org

Eventually, the courts ruled in his favour.
2012-10-22 09:53:34 AM  
1 votes:

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 09:51:48 AM  
1 votes:

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 09:39:29 AM  
1 votes:

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 09:39:26 AM  
1 votes:

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 09:38:39 AM  
1 votes:

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 09:38:30 AM  
1 votes:
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 09:32:21 AM  
1 votes:

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 09:29:25 AM  
1 votes:

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 09:25:14 AM  
1 votes:
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 09:24:08 AM  
1 votes:

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 09:23:14 AM  
1 votes:
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 09:15:59 AM  
1 votes:

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.
2012-10-22 09:15:25 AM  
1 votes:
Liestrong
2012-10-22 09:11:27 AM  
1 votes:
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 09:11:15 AM  
1 votes:
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 09:10:36 AM  
1 votes:

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 09:09:30 AM  
1 votes:

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 09:07:45 AM  
1 votes:
This is the epitome of the saying "If is seems too good to be true...."
2012-10-22 09:04:59 AM  
1 votes:
The titles are going to nobody. 1999-2005 will go down as having no winner.
2012-10-22 09:04:45 AM  
1 votes:

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.com
2012-10-22 09:01:09 AM  
1 votes:

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 09:00:12 AM  
1 votes:

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 08:59:12 AM  
1 votes:

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 08:58:36 AM  
1 votes:

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 08:58:08 AM  
1 votes:

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


You sound Republican.
2012-10-22 08:57:17 AM  
1 votes:
i.imgur.com
2012-10-22 08:53:12 AM  
1 votes:

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 08:52:16 AM  
1 votes:
Who knows where the truth is.
Sad.
2012-10-22 08:47:37 AM  
1 votes:

pag1107: fark cheaters.


If everyone is doing it, is it still cheating? If you prick him, does he not leak HGH?
2012-10-22 08:47:27 AM  
1 votes:
Livestrong Lance, and always go ball out in everything you do.

/jackass
//smug motherfarker too
2012-10-22 08:44:57 AM  
1 votes:
Armstrong stripped of Tour de France Titles, staged Moon Landing
2012-10-22 08:44:54 AM  
1 votes:
Good, fark that scum fark.
 
Displayed 108 of 108 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report