# Charges against Lance Armstrong?



## Monty_Brown (Jun 14, 2012)

So the US Doping Authorities are finally taking the plunge and throwing a bunch of charges at Lance Armstrong and various members of the US Postal/Radioshack team.

Letter leaked to Walll Street Journal...

http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/armstrongcharging0613.pdf

This goes way further than innuendo and they are now accusing him outright of doping, trafficking, concealment, conspiracy etc.


The letter implies there are plenty of ex team-maters ready to sing like canaries, and not just the discredited Floyd Landis this time.


----------



## USER1999 (Jun 14, 2012)

They have the same evidence the US government had, and they couldn't make it stick.

I for one, hope Armstrong is clean. Cycling really doesn't need this.


----------



## Aztecs27 (Jun 14, 2012)

murphthemog said:



			I for one, hope Armstrong is clean. Cycling really doesn't need this.
		
Click to expand...

Huge +1 on that.


----------



## Monty_Brown (Jun 14, 2012)

The material evidence seems the same, but it sounds like they've cut deals with a few witnesses this time, which might be why they have taken the plunge.

Whatever happens, it is going to damage the sport. If he's found guilty, it destroys the credibility of the sport and its "greatest" champion, and if  he'scleared, the whispering campaign and conspiracy theorists will cry cover up.


----------



## forefortheday (Jun 14, 2012)

He says he's passed over 500 drug tests in his career?

Surely he couldn't have passed 500 without them finding something?

If he has they should employ the guys who supplied his drugs to do the tests.

Perhaps they should just give up and say dope away, at least it would be a "level" playing field.


----------



## AmandaJR (Jun 14, 2012)

murphthemog said:



			They have the same evidence the US government had, and they couldn't make it stick.

I for one, hope Armstrong is clean. Cycling really doesn't need this.
		
Click to expand...

Me too. He's my sporting hero bar none and would be gutted to find out any truth in the constant rumours about him. Have spent years defending him to friends and colleagues who believe said rumours.

I believe he's clean 100%. Most tested athlete in history and no positive tests...that's not coincidence but innocence if you ask me.


----------



## bladeplayer (Jun 14, 2012)

forefortheday said:



			He says he's passed over 500 drug tests in his career?

Surely he couldn't have passed 500 without them finding something?

.
		
Click to expand...

i agree , If they find him guilty there is something mad wrong , he is one of the most tested athletes in history , because of the rumours & his victories ,


----------



## FairwayDodger (Jun 14, 2012)

AmandaJR said:



			Me too. He's my sporting hero bar none and would be gutted to find out any truth in the constant rumours about him. Have spent years defending him to friends and colleagues who believe said rumours.

I believe he's clean 100%. Most tested athlete in history and no positive tests...that's not coincidence but innocence if you ask me.
		
Click to expand...

Another +1 for me, will be very sad if it turns out otherwise.


----------



## bluewolf (Jun 14, 2012)

FairwayDodger said:



			Another +1 for me, will be very sad if it turns out otherwise.
		
Click to expand...

I really hope he's innocent. Lance is one of those people who is bigger than Sport. He's a hero to millions. 

Is it just me who sees some real problems with "buying" testimony from athletes who have been proven guilty. "Come here Mr Cyclist, if you tell some tales for us, we'll give you immunity.". Can't see any problems with that scenario, can you?


----------



## pokerjoke (Jun 15, 2012)

Its a witch hunt,somebody has seriously got a grudge against lance.
Hes a hero in America,and imo should stay that way.
Ive read all his books,and he trained like a mad man.
Getting woke up early in the mornings for testing at random.
He should be left alone to get on with his life,and aloud
to continue raising millions of pounds for his charities.
A great sportsman,and now a great infuence on many peoples lives.


----------



## USER1999 (Jun 15, 2012)

bluewolf said:



			Is it just me who sees some real problems with "buying" testimony from athletes who have been proven guilty. "Come here Mr Cyclist, if you tell some tales for us, we'll give you immunity.". Can't see any problems with that scenario, can you?
		
Click to expand...

This is how the American legal system works (or doesn't?).


----------



## Midnight (Jun 15, 2012)

I came on this thread thinking that people would be jumping on the band wagon and sating that he was guilty.

I fully agree with a lot of comments on here , Lance Armstrong is a amazing athlete , he has overcome huge obstacles in his life and is a inspiration to most people.


----------



## North Mimms (Jun 15, 2012)

Lance Armstrong has denied ever using drugs.. 
However he has admitted pedalling...


----------



## patricks148 (Jun 15, 2012)

pokerjoke said:



			Its a witch hunt,somebody has seriously got a grudge against lance.
Hes a hero in America,and imo should stay that way.
Ive read all his books,and he trained like a mad man.
Getting woke up early in the mornings for testing at random.
He should be left alone to get on with his life,and aloud
to continue raising millions of pounds for his charities.
A great sportsman,and now a great infuence on many peoples lives.
		
Click to expand...

Been out of cycling myself for a long time now, but once upon a time all the top riders were rumd to have been on EPO as it was called at the time. No saying anyone is guily or not but the sport has been tainted for some time.  I know the french hated the fact the Lance won Le Tour so many times and if they couldn't get anything to stick a doubt anyone else will.

Shame really, he over came a lot to get back to the top, but always set alarm bells ringing when he came back twice the rider he was before cancer.

And for the record i'm not saying he's Guilty.


----------



## FN2 (Jun 16, 2012)

North Mimms said:



			Lance Armstrong has denied ever using drugs.. 
However he has admitted pedalling...
		
Click to expand...

I'm as big a Lance fan as the next person and agree that it's the longest witch hunt in history. But the one thing that always worries me is Lance always seems to say 'I've never failed a test' rather than 'I've never used drugs'.


----------



## Richardb1012302 (Jun 16, 2012)

Read a book called "rough ride" great book of cycling and drug use. I think when lance was about the games was different, the rules were different and you have to accept the people he beat where all in the same boat as him.


----------



## Piece (Jun 16, 2012)

Like Kennedy's assassination or the Moon landing, the conspiracy will never end until they find something!

He has taken every test, passed them all. Denied taking drugs at every stage.

Hero of mine, so I really hope that after all this the book is finally closed and cycling can celebrate a legend properly.


----------



## Piece (Aug 24, 2012)

Not good headlines today :-(. Not sure what to make of it. It seems at the near final hurdle he decides he was tired of fighting and this coming from a man who fought the big C. Would have been good to see this USADA evidence - will it ever surface?

One of my heroes and I think he still is. I think.


----------



## North Mimms (Aug 24, 2012)

Piece said:



			Not good headlines today :-(. Not sure what to make of it. It seems at the near final hurdle he decides he was tired of fighting and this coming from a man who fought the big C. Would have been good to see this USADA evidence - will it ever surface?

One of my heroes and I think he still is. I think.
		
Click to expand...

I've never been keen on plea bargained evidence, and I gather the USADA is basing their case on a lot of it.


----------



## DelB (Aug 24, 2012)

Whole thing smells like a witch-hunt to me. Am I correct in saying that Armstrong NEVER failed a drug test at any point in his cycling career? The USADA are coming across like the British tabloid press in this instance.


----------



## Fader (Aug 24, 2012)

I've never really been into cycling so am pretty much jumping on the band wagon late having really enjoyed Le Tour and got right into it during the Olympics.

What I don't get about the whole thing is how USADA can even have a case considering he's never failed a drugs test. Unless i'm, missing something, but as I said i'm new to watching the cylcing so may not know the full details.


----------



## Snelly (Aug 24, 2012)

I heard David Walsh, the Sunday Times Chief Sports Writer and author of LA Confidential (a book on Armstrong with a strong argument for him being a doper) interviewed this morning and he said that the evidence that was due to come out was that 10 team mates of LA were going to testify that Armstrong took drugs, they saw him do it, he gave them EPO and they took drugs together.  10 team mates is not just a couple of blokes on plea bargains. It is pretty damning stuff.

In my opinion, Armstrong took drugs and masking agents, transfused blood and generally stayed ahead of the testers.   In doing so, he was on a level playing field with most other top professional road cyclists.  I think it is a cleaner sport now than it was but the Armstrong era was not a clean one. 

Another minor observation is that I find it more than surprising that a bloke who has enough guts and fight to win seven tours and beat cancer, doesn't quite have the fire in his belly to face the charges being brought.  Doesn't quite add up.  Especially when you add the fact that he has already fought similar charges in France and the USA and nothing has stuck.  What is different this time? He says he has just lost the will to keep fighting to clear his name but a simpler and more believable explanation would be that this time, he knows that the truth will out. 

And finally, excellent PR strategy from the Armstrong camp.  "It's a pointless witch hunt, 500 tests passed etc." Very clever. 

I thought Armstrong was an inspirational, amazing man for a long time.  That changed when I read David Walsh's book about five years ago and events since lead me to the opinion expressed above.


----------



## Snelly (Aug 24, 2012)

Here is an interesting read on this - http://velocitynation.com/content/interviews/2009/david-walsh

It is an interview that David Walsh gave and worth a look if you are interested in Lance and cycling.


----------



## bladeplayer (Aug 24, 2012)

Snelly said:



			.

In my opinion, Armstrong took drugs and masking agents, transfused blood and generally stayed ahead of the testers.   In doing so, he was on a level playing field with most other top professional road cyclists.  I think it is a cleaner sport now than it was but the Armstrong era was not a clean one. 

.
		
Click to expand...

Does this mean tho that EVERY cyclist of that time was at the same aswell, if not why werent they if its hideable ?  , if LA could hide the drug taking so could everyone else , (im not for a second saying that makes it ok)  

what reprecussions does this have for every the result cycling event of that time? ...anyone that beat armtrong or won the GIRO or the welta etc must also have been doing it ..


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Aug 24, 2012)

And LA stripped of his seven tour wins for being a naughty boy?


----------



## FairwayDodger (Aug 24, 2012)

Sad news that LA is giving up the fight; hard to see it as anything other than an admission of guilt. I'd still like to believe his protestations but I guess we'll never know for sure now.


----------



## bladeplayer (Aug 24, 2012)

But surely this is an admission by the doping agencies that they got it wrong ? & got it wrong over a number of years


----------



## Snelly (Aug 24, 2012)

bladeplayer said:



			Does this mean tho that EVERY cyclist of that time was at the same aswell, if not why werent they if its hideable ?  , if LA could hide the drug taking so could everyone else , (im not for a second saying that makes it ok)  

what reprecussions does this have for every the result cycling event of that time? ...anyone that beat armtrong or won the GIRO or the welta etc must also have been doing it ..
		
Click to expand...

I don't think so.  I would think that a lot of the cyclists were clean but it is very difficult territory to prove who did what in hindsight.


----------



## CMAC (Aug 24, 2012)

saw this on Twitter, I know nada about cycling

Armstrongs TdF victorys

1999
1. Lance Armstrong
2. Alex ZÃ¼lle (â€˜98 busted for EPO)
3. Fernando EscartÃ­n (Systematic team doping exposed in â€˜04)
4. Laurent Dufaux (â€˜98 busted for EPO)
5. Ãngel Casero (â€˜06 implicated in Operacion Puerto)

2000
1. Lance Armstrong
2. Jan Ullrich (â€˜06 implicated in Operacion Puerto)
3. Joseba Beloki (â€˜06 implicated in Operacion Puerto)
4. Christophe Moraue (â€˜98 busted for EPO)
5. Roberto Heras (â€˜05 busted for EPO)

2001
1. Lance Armstrong
2. Jan Ullrich (â€˜06 implicated in Operacion Puerto)
3. Joseba Beloki (â€˜06 implicated in Operacion Puerto)
4. Andrei Kivilev
5. Igor GonzÃ¡lez de Galdeano (â€˜06 implicated in Operacion Puerto)

2002
1. Lance Armstrong
2. Joseba Beloki (â€˜06 implicated in Operacion Puerto)
3. Raimondas RumÅ¡as (Suspended in â€˜03 for doping)
4. Santiago Botero (â€˜06 implicated in Operacion Puerto)
5. Igor GonzÃ¡lez de Galdeano (â€˜06 implicated in Operacion Puerto)

2003
1. Lance Armstrong
2. Jan Ullrich (â€˜06 implicated in Operacion Puerto)
3. Alexander Vinokourov (Suspended in â€˜07 for CERA)
4. Tyler Hamilton (Suspended â€˜04 for blood doping)
5. Haimar Zubeldia

2004
1. Lance Armstrong
2. Andreas Kloden (Named in doping case in â€˜08)
3. Ivan Basso (Suspended in â€˜07 for Operacion Puerto ties)
4. Jan Ullrich (â€˜06 implicated in Operacion Puerto)
5. Jose Azevedo (â€˜06 implicated in Operacion Puerto)

2005
1. Lance Armstrong
2. Ivan Basso (Suspended in â€˜07 for Operacion Puerto ties)
3. Jan Ullrich (â€˜06 implicated in Operacion Puerto)
4. Fransico Mancebo (â€˜06 implicated in Operacion Puerto)
5. Alexander Vinokourov (Suspended in â€˜07 for CERA)


----------



## Fader (Aug 24, 2012)

Right so based on the above post by Darth, what are they going to achieve with this prosection or persection of LA. With all the exposures of doping from those other competitors sounds like they need to get the dope testing sorted and look at current atheletes and going forward not living in the past. 

All it'll prove if found guilty is that he got away with it longer than others


----------



## Piece (Aug 24, 2012)

Snelly said:



			I heard David Walsh, the Sunday Times Chief Sports Writer and author of LA Confidential (a book on Armstrong with a strong argument for him being a doper) interviewed this morning and he said that the evidence that was due to come out was that 10 team mates of LA were going to testify that Armstrong took drugs, they saw him do it, he gave them EPO and they took drugs together. 10 team mates is not just a couple of blokes on plea bargains. It is pretty damning stuff.

In my opinion, Armstrong took drugs and masking agents, transfused blood and generally stayed ahead of the testers. In doing so, he was on a level playing field with most other top professional road cyclists. I think it is a cleaner sport now than it was but the Armstrong era was not a clean one. 

Another minor observation is that I find it more than surprising that a bloke who has enough guts and fight to win seven tours and beat cancer, doesn't quite have the fire in his belly to face the charges being brought. Doesn't quite add up. Especially when you add the fact that he has already fought similar charges in France and the USA and nothing has stuck. What is different this time? He says he has just lost the will to keep fighting to clear his name but a simpler and more believable explanation would be that this time, he knows that the truth will out. 

And finally, excellent PR strategy from the Armstrong camp. "It's a pointless witch hunt, 500 tests passed etc." Very clever. 

I thought Armstrong was an inspirational, amazing man for a long time. That changed when I read David Walsh's book about five years ago and events since lead me to the opinion expressed above.
		
Click to expand...

I don't know about David Walsh or his book, but I do know until we see firm evidence and testimony from other riders and irrefutable testing proof, then this is a cloud that will forever remain. I can't understand how a man who is the most tested probably in history, with random, unannounced testing can think (even with pro doctors and masking agents) think he can get away with it for around 10 years?

Everyone in cycling has an opinion about LA. Journos, cyclists and team-mates. Some are more braver than other to voice their dislike. Some do it for publicity sake. Some do it to shift books sales and make a name for themselves. Whatever the motive, the fact is that no evidence has come to light to say he was using EPO or something else. USADA must release all their evidence to justify this, otherwise it's like a kangaroo court, condemning a man based on the bought evidence of some disgraced team-mates. If he is guilty, then let's see the information and I'll be first to say, "Lance you cheat".

And finally, if guilty, then it shows that no cycling result from the last 15 years can be relied upon due to holes in the drug testing. In fact, why stop there and lets have a look at Miguel Indurain medical records....


----------



## Snelly (Aug 24, 2012)

It is widely accepted that Big Mig was pharmaceutically assisted. 


And there is one reason why the LA machine doesn't want to go through this and get to a proven verdict - money. 

The LA website is marketed as a charity effectively and in generates millions.  In fact it is not and the website is a profit making one for the big businesses involved.  Similarly, the Livestrong brand, owned by Nike but with LA as a key shareholder, is a multi-million dollar revenue stream.  

A damning guilty verdict in court has serious implications for these booming ventures and I would think is something to be avoided at all costs, including LA being stripped of 7 titles.


----------



## CMAC (Aug 24, 2012)

if it is true then I'm going to seriously doubt his story of going to the moon!





- wheres the flippin' smileys when you need them.


----------



## Piece (Aug 24, 2012)

Snelly said:



			A damning guilty verdict in court has serious implications for these booming ventures and I would think is something to be avoided at all costs, including LA being stripped of 7 titles.
		
Click to expand...

It wouldn't have been a court verdict, it would have been a USADA proceeding. LA asked the US courts to intervene and stop USADA from this allegedly illegal and one-sided process. If I've read things right, LA wanted the US courts to be the independent arbitor, thus ensuring a fair process. They declined, saying the US justice system shouldn't get involved in what is a cycling internal issue, with a significant note saying they sided with LA in the apparent unfairness of USADA process. 

It will be very interesting to see if UCI and other cycling unions strip LA of all titles.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Aug 24, 2012)

sounds like he's getting stripped of his seven TourdF titles.


----------



## Chrimbo (Aug 24, 2012)

Piece said:



			I can't understand how a man who is the most tested probably in history, with random, unannounced testing can think (even with pro doctors and masking agents) think he can get away with it for around 10 years?
		
Click to expand...

Unfortunately the testers are five steps behind the cheats, they often don't know what they are looking for.  Thats why now they keep the samples from the Olympics for 8 years.

As an example Marion Jones, the USA sprinter, was tested on numerous occasions but it wasn't until the Balco scandal that the truth come out and that she admitted she was using performance enhancing drugs.


----------



## Piece (Aug 24, 2012)

Chrimbo said:



			Unfortunately the testers are five steps behind the cheats, they often don't know what they are looking for.  Thats why now they keep the samples from the Olympics for 8 years.

As an example Marion Jones, the USA sprinter, was tested on numerous occasions but it wasn't until the Balco scandal that the truth come out and that she admitted she was using performance enhancing drugs.
		
Click to expand...

Begs the question that no winner is actually 'ratified' until 8 years after they win! Unless you are LA, then it's 13 years...


----------



## Chrimbo (Aug 24, 2012)

Piece said:



			Begs the question that no winner is actually 'ratified' until 8 years after they win! Unless you are LA, then it's 13 years...
		
Click to expand...

It means that those who have cheated will get caught even when they think they have got away with it.  A hammer thrower from Belarus was sent home from the olympics because a sample given in 2004 was re-checked and found positive for performance enhancing drugs.


----------



## Karl102 (Aug 24, 2012)

Piece said:



			I don't know about David Walsh or his book, but I do know until we see firm evidence and testimony from other riders and irrefutable testing proof, then this is a cloud that will forever remain. I can't understand how a man who is the most tested probably in history, with random, unannounced testing can think (even with pro doctors and masking agents) think he can get away with it for around 10 years?

Everyone in cycling has an opinion about LA. Journos, cyclists and team-mates. Some are more braver than other to voice their dislike. Some do it for publicity sake. Some do it to shift books sales and make a name for themselves. Whatever the motive, the fact is that no evidence has come to light to say he was using EPO or something else. USADA must release all their evidence to justify this, otherwise it's like a kangaroo court, condemning a man based on the bought evidence of some disgraced team-mates. If he is guilty, then let's see the information and I'll be first to say, "Lance you cheat".

And finally, if guilty, then it shows that no cycling result from the last 15 years can be relied upon due to holes in the drug testing. In fact, why stop there and lets have a look at Miguel Indurain medical records....
		
Click to expand...

These 2 posts say it all. I also found his books inspirational.....I hope it's not true!


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Aug 24, 2012)

I think he's been scuppered by witness evidence being accepted - rather than anything to do with testing.


----------



## pokerjoke (Aug 24, 2012)

Surely the worst thing for Lance if the 7 titles are taken away is,he goes from legend
to obscurity.
I believe if he was innocent he woud fight,as hes done all his life.
I also believe he is doing it to protect others,because if it is true hes a drug cheat,many others knew.
When i was watching him,and ive watched all his Tour De France victorys,was the thrill it gave me.
Unbelievable athelete.
Cycling has finally got a champion in Bradley,and Mark Cavendish we can be proud of.
I was watching Contador  yesterday and i couldnt help myself but call him a cheat.
If and i mean if,LA was a cheat then im gutted,but you have to hold your hands up and say he cheated.


----------



## Ethan (Aug 24, 2012)

I think LA has calculated that he would rather see this end now without full hearings and with him being able to deny doping. Then he can exist as a wronged hero rather than a convicted doper. In time, the public will cool on the issue and he can continue to deny the charges and blame the system for miscarriages of justice. 

FWIW, I think the general consensus was that they were all at it back then. Some were better at dodging the tests, or perhaps knowing when 'random' tests were going to happen.


----------



## Andy808 (Aug 24, 2012)

Well the witch hunt is over. 
I have never believed LA was using drugs and, until he admits it or there is definetive proof, will never believe he's used drugs to win anything. The USADA has had an agenda against Armstrong for years and years. I also think he's had enough of the crap they have thrown at him for the best part of a decade. The only drug users are the dopers that have had it in for him from the USADA. 
If this is the case then anyone winning any sporting event will have it devalued with the constant threat of having a title taken away from them.


----------



## Ethan (Aug 24, 2012)

Andy808 said:



			Well the witch hunt is over. 
I have never believed LA was using drugs and, until he admits it or there is definetive proof, will never believe he's used drugs to win anything. The USADA has had an agenda against Armstrong for years and years. I also think he's had enough of the crap they have thrown at him for the best part of a decade. The only drug users are the dopers that have had it in for him from the USADA. 
If this is the case then anyone winning any sporting event will have it devalued with the constant threat of having a title taken away from them.
		
Click to expand...

And that is precisely the effect I referred to above that LA was looking for by this act.


----------



## Piece (Aug 24, 2012)

Ethan said:



			And that is precisely the effect I referred to above that LA was looking for by this act.
		
Click to expand...

Agree too.

There is the scenario that LA's action leaves USADA on its own. It now has to formally justify its action to LA, WADA and the UCI in writing. If the UCI feels there isn't sufficient evidence then it may choose to ignore the USADA finding, forcing USADA to expose themselves further. It could be that their evidence falls flat, leaving them totally isolated and embarrassed. Just a thought.


----------



## Fader (Aug 25, 2012)

Well confirmed in the press this morning that all 7 of his Tour titles have been stripped from him by USADA. 

Also states that UCI do not back the decision to do so, as they have yet to be provided proof of LA's guilt. Also stated Tour officials are yet to back the decision based on USADA irrefutable proof. 

Given a lifetime ban also, ironic considering he's retired. 

Not sure what to make of it, I can't say I back USADA's decision, simply he hasn't been proved guilty before stripping the titles. 

So for me LA remains a n iconic sporting legend until the proof is put out for us all to see. Only then will I say fair enough he's a cheat and take him off that legendary pedestal that he resides on beside the likes of Ali, Senna, Schumacher, Pele et al.


----------



## Chrimbo (Aug 25, 2012)

Fader said:



			Well confirmed in the press this morning that all 7 of his Tour titles have been stripped from him by USADA. 

Also states that UCI do not back the decision to do so, as they have yet to be provided proof of LA's guilt. Also stated Tour officials are yet to back the decision based on USADA irrefutable proof.
		
Click to expand...

They are waiting for the USADA to provided them with the evidence on which they have based their decision on.



Fader said:



			Given a lifetime ban also, ironic considering he's retired.
		
Click to expand...

He was hoping to return to competing in trathlons and this will not be possible now.



Fader said:



			Not sure what to make of it, I can't say I back USADA's decision, simply he hasn't been proved guilty before stripping the titles.
		
Click to expand...

He has taken the decision not to defend himself against the charges made by the USADA who believe they have sufficient evidence to prove drug abuse.  He has denied himself the right to defend his reputation against these charges and left the USADA no other alternative but to find him guilty and to strip him of his titles.  Only time will tell if the ICU, after seeing the evidence, will agree with the USADA.



Fader said:



			So for me LA remains a n iconic sporting legend until the proof is put out for us all to see. Only then will I say fair enough he's a cheat and take him off that legendary pedestal that he resides on beside the likes of Ali, Senna, Schumacher, Pele et al.
		
Click to expand...

I have heard him referred to as having a 'marmite' personality, you either like him or you don't.  The general opinion by most commentators is that he has made a calculated decision as those who support him will always believe he was clean and those who don't will point out all the circumstantial evidence against him and the statements from his former team mates.


----------



## DappaDonDave (Aug 25, 2012)

Who cares the guy won 7 tour de France titles back to back. Give me crack, speed and heroin and I'm still not going to make its through the first leg.

I think the question should be asked...how much of an advantage did he get from whatever he did? Was it more than his competitors at the time?

That's like taking ferraris titles because now, the rules say we use smaller engines, and they used bigger ones for their wins.

Absolutely rediculous!

Still a legend

"Pain is temporary, quitting lasts forever,"


----------



## Fader (Aug 25, 2012)

Also one of the major factors is IF he is guilty, which is unproven,  the majority of those that finished high up on the tours he won, have been found guilty of doping. So IF he is guilty then all he did was beat a bunch of other cheats..

Agree that he is still a Legend and always will be, USADA can claim his guilt based on plea bargains and his desire to stop fighting them, but the fact remains he never failed a drugs test and thats all the proof thats needed.


----------



## Snelly (Aug 25, 2012)

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/94...-charges-feels-like-a-shocking-surrender.html 

A good article today on this subject.

My opinion is that if you think that LA is walking away from fighting these charges for any other reason than he knows for a fact that he will lose and be totally discredited then you are very naive indeed.

He cheated. They have him bang to rights and he is backing down to avoid the final coup de grace.


----------



## Fader (Aug 25, 2012)

Snelly said:



http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/94...-charges-feels-like-a-shocking-surrender.html 

A good article today on this subject.

My opinion is that if you think that LA is walking away from fighting these charges for any other reason than he knows for a fact that he will lose and be totally discredited then you are very naive indeed.

He cheated. They have him bang to rights and he is backing down to avoid the final coup de grace.
		
Click to expand...

Bang to rights would mean proving he failed a drugs test, thus meaning irrefutable evidence not just the words of others.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Aug 25, 2012)

Unfortunately as in all such instances - it's all myths and legends - the legend is found out to be a myth, but despite being so is still held up my many as a legend (see also thread on Rangers (IA) 1996-2012 for another more recent example of the phenomenon)


----------



## Snelly (Aug 25, 2012)

Fader said:



			Bang to rights would mean proving he failed a drugs test, thus meaning irrefutable evidence not just the words of others.
		
Click to expand...

Why then in your view isn't he fighting the charges?


----------



## Imurg (Aug 25, 2012)

DappaDonDave said:



			I think the question should be asked...how much of an advantage did he get from whatever he did? Was it more than his competitors at the time?
		
Click to expand...

If there was 1 competitor who was "clean" then he's gained an advantage and cheated.

By not challenging the accusations he's implying guilt - whether he's guilty or not............


----------



## Fader (Aug 25, 2012)

It may be that he's guilty, it maybe that like he says he's tired of fighting a system which is going to go ahead and hold him as guilty regardless of the fact that the US Judicial system did agree that USADA were wrong to pursue this avenue without irrefutable proof, even though they refused to get involved as it's not a legal case.

*It could also be that regardless of the fact it is merely based on the word of others that mud sticks  regardless of guilt/innocence*.

My own view is that that of the above in bold, if evidence is found to prove he is guilty then i'd happily call the man a cheat. Though it's hard to look down on someone with his achievements considering the rest of the fields were at it to.

At the end of the day he alone knows his reasons for doing this, and if thats because he is guilty then better this way than prolong the agony, but if he is innocent then USADA are no more than a group of bully boys on a witch hunt.

In truth  will we ever know the real reasoning behind it, No we won't because despite them basing their evidence on the plea of others, no-one can argue with the fact LA never failed a drugs test. So maybe they need to look at the testing elements they use.


----------



## Imurg (Aug 25, 2012)

Fader said:



			In truth  will we ever know the real reasoning behind it, No we won't because despite them basing their evidence on the plea of others, no-one can argue with the fact LA never failed a drugs test. So maybe they need to look at the testing elements they use.
		
Click to expand...

We'll never know because LA won't defend against the charges.........Why?

If he has nothing to hide then he has his name to clear and reputation to preserve.
If he doesn't defend he's implying guilt.

Doesn't he care about his reputation..?


----------



## Ethan (Aug 25, 2012)

Fader said:



			Also one of the major factors is IF he is guilty, which is unproven,  the majority of those that finished high up on the tours he won, have been found guilty of doping. So IF he is guilty then all he did was beat a bunch of other cheats..

Agree that he is still a Legend and always will be, USADA can claim his guilt based on plea bargains and his desire to stop fighting them, but the fact remains he never failed a drugs test and thats all the proof thats needed.
		
Click to expand...

So which way do you want it - he was a cheat but so was everyone else, or he wasn't a cheat at all? Seems like you are in denial, as well as a state of confusion.

There is no way that LA would have stopped this fight unless he knew it was going to turn out worse for him. There is also obviously more to it than the fact that he never failed a drugs test, if indeed that is the case. Perhaps more modern techniques have cast a different light on that, or evidence of tampering or masking have emerged, or there was something dodgy about the scheduling of tests. And if he has been observed providing team mates with drugs or blocking agents, then he is just as guilty. It is laughable to simply brush aside 'the word of others'. That is the basis of the lgal system, and unless you are some sort of paranoid conspiracy nut, then witness statements need to be considered. 

The legend is shattered now, either way. Either he is a cheat or he doesn't have what it takes to stand up for his reputation and that of the sport he claims to love.


----------



## Piece (Aug 25, 2012)

Snelly said:



http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/94...-charges-feels-like-a-shocking-surrender.html 

A good article today on this subject.

My opinion is that if you think that LA is walking away from fighting these charges for any other reason than he knows for a fact that he will lose and be totally discredited then you are very naive indeed.

He cheated. They have him bang to rights and he is backing down to avoid the final coup de grace.
		
Click to expand...

Eh? Where is the evidence he cheated? Nothing has come to light.

However, if the evidence in the future categorically proves he cheated, then I will say he's a cheat. But no one can say he cheated before that time.


----------



## Fader (Aug 25, 2012)

I'm not in denial at all. Far from it, i've said if it's proven then fine i'll call him a cheat which is what he will be proven to be and until then i'm open minded about it.

Of course there is more to in than he never failed a drug test but the fact is this is based on the words and pleas of others not on medical evidence.

So maybe his refusal to defend himself is a way of admitting his guilt, but as stated before I will hold my judgement until everything is out in the open.

Plus what he's achieved will always be a legend in my opinion.


----------



## DappaDonDave (Aug 25, 2012)

Imurg said:



			If there was 1 competitor who was "clean" then he's gained an advantage and cheated.

By not challenging the accusations he's implying guilt - whether he's guilty or not............
		
Click to expand...

Innocent until proven guilty...prove he was doped up


----------



## Ethan (Aug 25, 2012)

Fader said:



			Of course there is more to in than he never failed a drug test but the fact is this is based on the words and pleas of others not on medical evidence.
		
Click to expand...

So it just happens that Armstrong has worked with renowned convicted doping team doctors and trainers, and there is a series of team mates, other cyclists, trainers, doctors, officials and other witnesses who all make allegations suggesting a systematic pattern of doping, as well as a number of out of court settlements (sealed records, nice), and they are all lying or mistaken or part of a huge elaborate conspiracy going back a decade or more? 

Common sense suggests that is very unlikely indeed. 

Armstrong could have challenged the evidence if it was so weak, but he knew what the verdict would be and how difficult it would be to play Spartacus afterwards, so he pulled out. Probably a smart move on his part, because he still gets to hold on to the true believers and skeptics, unlike the complete destruction of his reputation which would have followed the hearing.


----------



## Imurg (Aug 25, 2012)

DappaDonDave said:



			Innocent until proven guilty...prove he was doped up
		
Click to expand...

How can you if he won't defend against the charges?

By not doing anything, as I said, guilt is implied - regardless of whether it can be proven or not......

If I accuse you of blowing someone's head off with a shotgun and I say I'll see you in Court because I have evidence, if you don't show up to answer the charges then you're implying guilt.

If you have nothing to hide - stand up and answer the charges. 

Then the facts will be known.
until then there's doubt.......


----------



## DappaDonDave (Aug 25, 2012)

Imurg said:



			How can you if he won't defend against the charges?

By not doing anything, as I said, guilt is implied - regardless of whether it can be proven or not......

If I accuse you of blowing someone's head off with a shotgun and I say I'll see you in Court because I have evidence, if you don't show up to answer the charges then you're implying guilt.

If you have nothing to hide - stand up and answer the charges. 

Then the facts will be known.
until then there's doubt.......
		
Click to expand...

I can't recall that being a law. Guilt is proven, not implied. Otherwise it would be guilty until proven innocent.

He is saying, I'm not fighting these charges, not, these charges prove im guilty. It should be up to the accuser to prove it.

Based on your example, prove I blew someone's head off with a shotgun. You can't, ergo, I'm not guilty. No matter how much you say it's true, it's not, unil you are able to prove sufficient evidence.


----------



## Imurg (Aug 25, 2012)

DappaDonDave said:



			I can't recall that being a law. Guilt is proven, not implied. Otherwise it would be guilty until proven innocent.

He is saying, I'm not fighting these charges, not, these charges prove im guilty. It should be up to the accuser to prove it.

Based on your example, prove I blew someone's head off with a shotgun. You can't, ergo, I'm not guilty. No matter how much you say it's true, it's not, unil you are able to prove sufficient evidence.
		
Click to expand...

I'm not saying your guilty - but I may have proof so come to court to hear what proof I have.......

And yes in Law you're innocent until proven guilty but if you're not guilty wouldn't you want to go to a court and have it proven?

But by not defending charges the implication is that there must be something to hide.

That alone is enough to damage a reputation.


----------



## RGDave (Aug 25, 2012)

North Mimms said:



			Lance Armstrong has denied ever using drugs.. 
However he has admitted pedalling...
		
Click to expand...

Boom, boom!

I think it's a sad day. In a statement the USADA claimed it had clear evidence that Armstrong had taken performance-enhancing drugs.
If this is true, then what the heck is going on? Is it OK to come out years later and accuse someone? 
Whether he did or didn't, that was then, this is now.
I intend to ignore all this and not let the rumour mill ruin his reputation.


----------



## PhilTheFragger (Aug 25, 2012)

Its a sad day for sport, as far as Im concerned all the evidence is hear say, he hasnt ever failed a drugs test and to me , that is what counts. The whole thing smacks of a witch hunt.

This is a man who beat cancer to come back and win again.  the medicines he had to take to combat his illness could contain all sorts of funny compounds, which could stay in the body for ages, but he never failed a drugs test.

Should we delay the Olympic medal ceremonies for 8 years, so we can be sure that they are not cheats
How about Usain Bolt wins the 100 meters at London 2012, but the medal ceremony gives the Gold to Justin Gatlin for his 2004 victory in Athens.

LA has had this "Cheat" thing hanging over his head for years, he has faught it and I think that he is just so hacked off with the whole thing, that he is saying " Enough is enough, think what you think" I want my life back

To fight this in the courts would cost millions and take years 

I think its the actions of a man who knows that whatever happens, he cant win because some people will always throw rocks

Fragger


----------



## Chrimbo (Aug 25, 2012)

PhilTheFragger said:



			Its a sad day for sport, as far as Im concerned all the evidence is hear say, he hasnt ever failed a drugs test and to me , that is what counts. The whole thing smacks of a witch hunt.
		
Click to expand...

There are sportsmen and women who have never failed a drugs test but later admitted to doing so.  

At this moment in time Lance Armstrong hasn't failed a drugs test or admitted to using performance enhancing drugs or illegal methods, but there is circumstantial evidence and the testimony of team member that say he did.  He has the opportunity to contest the allegations made against him but chooses not to do so.  He could seek arbitration from the World Anti-Doping Agency which he has also refused to do.

The conclusion which is being drawn is that he can't contest the allegations as they are true and by making himself the 'victim' means that those who support him will always regard him as a 'Living Legend' who won by fair means against all odds.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Aug 25, 2012)

Could LA not be 'tried' in his absence?


----------



## Chrimbo (Aug 25, 2012)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Could LA not be 'tried' in his absence?
		
Click to expand...

That's what the USADA have done and found him guilty as he refused to contest the charges.


----------



## Ethan (Aug 25, 2012)

PhilTheFragger said:



			This is a man who beat cancer to come back and win again.  the medicines he had to take to combat his illness could contain all sorts of funny compounds, which could stay in the body for ages, but he never failed a drugs test.
		
Click to expand...

His chemo regime is reported on the internet, and it is said he opted for a certain regime which was less likely to have lung side effects, which may have impaired his exercise tolerance. He almost certainly received steroids and Epo during that time. I am not sure what is meant by funny compounds but none of these medicines stay in the body for ages.


----------



## sweatysock41 (Aug 25, 2012)

I read with interest on the never failed a drugs test well this quote from the Telegraph seems to indicate otherwise.

'There is nothing new in the allegations around Armstrong. Although one of his most-repeated lines of defence is that he has never tested positive, this is not true. He tested positive for corticosteroids during the 1999 Tour, but produced a backdated doctorâ€™s prescription and avoided a sanction.'

Amazing how you don't declare the use of a steroid with a doctors prescription up front.


----------



## Piece (Aug 25, 2012)

sweatysock41 said:



			I read with interest on the never failed a drugs test well this quote from the Telegraph seems to indicate otherwise.

'There is nothing new in the allegations around Armstrong. Although one of his most-repeated lines of defence is that he has never tested positive, this is not true. He tested positive for corticosteroids during the 1999 Tour, but produced a backdated doctorâ€™s prescription and avoided a sanction.'

Amazing how you don't declare the use of a steroid with a doctors prescription up front.



Click to expand...

Because it was a permitted use of a saddle sore cream. Again, no story here, just a journo who needs to justify his salary.


----------



## Smiffy (Aug 26, 2012)

murphthemog said:



			Cycling really doesn't need this.
		
Click to expand...

Judging by the antics I see most cyclists get up to on my way to/from work, I think most of them are doped up to the eyeballs


----------



## Foxholer (Aug 26, 2012)

Whether or not LA doped is of little importance to me as I believe the whole of cycling was doping at that time. I'm unconvinced that it is now 'clean'! Armstrong was simply the best rider (and hider?) of the time.

I agree with his assertions that he won't get a 'fair' hearing - I don't believe it's actually a trial - as evidence that would be required to be disclosed in a trial is being withheld - for debate-able reason.

His battle against testicular cancer, while laudable, is only the same as that of many others, including several golfers and a well respected snooker player. What is stunning is his subsequent fund-raising for this cause. Whether that gets affected by this publicity is to be seen, but the need for it has not gone away. I do wonder, however, what would happen if  'cure' was found. Would the Foundation wind down or would it, as a huge money-spinner with lots of vested interests (including LA himself?), morph into related (hugely beneficial) goals. 

It will be interesting, to meat least, to see how the 'jurisdiction' issue plays out. The relationships between USADA, which brought the charges etc, WADA and UCI don't seem to mean, to me at least, that the USADA can strip LA of his medals. That may be a recommendation, but I believe is up to UCI to apply 'appropriate' sanctions.


----------



## Ethan (Aug 26, 2012)

Piece said:



			Because it was a permitted use of a saddle sore cream. Again, no story here, just a journo who needs to justify his salary.
		
Click to expand...

I have no issue with legitimate use of steroids for medical conditions. They are commonly used for a range of conditions from asthma to various auto-immune conditions, and to supplement cancer treatments. But they are relatively short acting, so after treatment, the rider can be "clean" again pretty quickly.


----------



## Snelly (Oct 10, 2012)

So, does anyone have a change in opinion now that the report is published? 1000 pages of evidence supporting the charges!!

From this evening's Telegraph.........

 Most damning of all, perhaps, is the fact that the report claims that Armstrong not only doped, but that he promoted the use of illegal products throughout his team and even supplied them to his team-mates.
"The evidence is overwhelming that Lance Armstrong did not just use performance enhancing drugs, he supplied them to his team-mates," the report says.
It will be interesting to see what the US Postal Service have to say about this. I can't really see the US government being too happy to hear that one of their citizens have been using the state purse to buy drugs.
"His goal [of winning the Tour de France multiple times] led him to depend on EPO, testosterone and blood transfusions but also, more ruthlessly, to expect and to require that his team-mates would likewise use drugs to support his goals if not their own."
It added: "It was not enough that his team-mates give maximum effort on the bike, he also required that they adhere to the doping programme outlined for them or be replaced.
"He was not just a part of the doping culture on his team, he enforced and re-enforced it.
"Armstrong's use of drugs was extensive, and the doping programme on his team, designed in large part to benefit Armstrong, was massive and pervasive."


----------



## Snelly (Oct 10, 2012)

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/ot...trong-doping-case-findings-revealed-live.html

Pretty conclusive really.  Vindication for David Walsh and Paul Kimmage - it seems they were absolutely right for many years.


----------



## richart (Oct 10, 2012)

Yes, a cheat. It seems the excuse amongst his team was the only way they could beat the drugs cheats was to join them.

I always feel sorry for people that get beaten by drug cheats. Sharon Davies is always remembered for her silver medal in the Olympics, even though the East German that beat her has admitted taking drug (no surprise there as all East German athletes were)


----------



## Jon321 (Oct 10, 2012)

Such a shame. It was a great story after what he had come through. Now his legacy is destroyed. Wonder if it was worth it now he's going to have all his titles wiped out.


----------



## Piece (Oct 10, 2012)

Not great news for LA is it? Very sad, as he was a hero of mine. 

Lets hope they go after other big cheats now.


----------



## JustOne (Oct 10, 2012)

First Jimmy Saville and now this... there'll be none of Smiffy's heroes left soon


----------



## SS2 (Oct 11, 2012)

Armstrong's lawyer was interveiwed on TV last night. When asked why his client was giving up and not contesting the charges his answer was typical lawyer speak: LA wants to concentrate on his charitable work etc etc. I have not seen any of the evidence against LA yet but my take on the lawyer's interview is that he is guilty as sin for this simple reason: If I had won the Tour De France multiple times and the USADA for whatever reason had a vendetta against me to falsely prove that I was a drug cheat I would fight with every breath in my body and  pound in my pocket to prove they were lying. I reasonably expect LA  to do the same and his reasons for not contesting the accusations just don't add up.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Oct 11, 2012)

Jon321 said:



			Such a shame. It was a great story after what he had come through. Now his legacy is destroyed. Wonder if it was worth it now he's going to have all his titles wiped out.
		
Click to expand...

I wonder what will happen to all the money he 'earned' and all of the donations in his name to cancer charities.


----------



## USER1999 (Oct 11, 2012)

Sad day, as I had hoped LA was clean. Strip him of his titles? Why? Who do you give them to, as most others who finished top ten in that era have subsequently been found guilty of doping. Jan ulrich came second to LA a few times, give the win to him? No chance. No one has stripped Indurain of his titles, and I think the great hypocrite Bernard Hinault still has his, despite admitting cheating.

To me, the money and effort spent on this would have been better put to use catching today's crop of cheats. Let by gones be bygones. Let LA run his charities, and move on.


----------



## patricks148 (Oct 11, 2012)

They keep saying on the news he's been stripped of his 7 tour titles, but i do't think they can only the UCI can do that, right?

I'm not sure the UCI will come out and do anything, it could open a whole can of worms with all the other  guys involved in blood doping that won tours and classics.

Trouble is i think all the big teams were doing it its was the only way to compete.

The whole EPO thing i thought was a tricky one anyway same results as altitude training.


----------



## USER1999 (Oct 11, 2012)

Why do posts on this thread get referred to the mods?


----------



## BeachGolfer (Oct 11, 2012)

I don't believe that story of him playing the trumpet on the moon either.


----------



## jammag (Oct 11, 2012)

It is a shame that so many people treated this guy as a hero and so it is very hard to believe for a lot of people. I keep hearing about oh think of the charity work hes done and it balances out. I dont think it does personally as if he was known as a cheat hardly anyone would have put money into his charity just due to the fact it had his name on it. 

Personally I think hes guilty I dont see why he wouldnt fight the charges and also how the officials seem to be describing I am pretty sure they have this process sussed inside out.


----------



## Andy808 (Oct 11, 2012)

5 of his ex-team mates have been banned by the USADA for 6 MONTHS. So they said if you grass him up and admit it you will get a short ban and they all went for it. From 98 to 2011 there have been 26 podium placed riders banned or had their places stripped for doping compared to 16 placed riders who haven't, so far, been banned or stripped of their position in the Tour De France. It pretty much makes the whole race a farce when from 96 to 06 ALL winners have been banned, only 3 racers since 96 have the winner not been banned to date.
The whole thing is becoming a circus act that noone wants to see anymore.


----------



## SyR (Oct 12, 2012)

It's his life's work that is being taken away from him. You would think he would be fighting it if it weren't true??


----------



## Piece (Oct 17, 2012)

Just been dropped by one of his biggest supporters - Nike. And now also left as chairman of Livestrong.


----------



## Foxholer (Oct 17, 2012)

Piece said:



			Just been dropped by one of his biggest supporters - *Nike*. And now also left as chairman of Livestrong.
		
Click to expand...

Nike must be wondering whether it's worth sponsoring the 'best' in the world, with both Armstrong and Woods being somewhat embarrassing for them!


----------



## cookelad (Oct 17, 2012)

Foxholer said:



			Nike must be wondering whether it's worth sponsoring the 'best' in the world, with both Armstrong and Woods being somewhat embarrassing for them!
		
Click to expand...

Wonder what McIlroy's got up his sleeve!


----------

