Charges against Lance Armstrong?

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.
 
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 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 ..
 
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 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.
 
saw this on Twitter, I know nada about cycling

Armstrongs TdF victorys

1999
1. Lance Armstrong
2. Alex Zülle (‘98 busted for EPO)
3. Fernando Escartín (Systematic team doping exposed in ‘04)
4. Laurent Dufaux (‘98 busted for EPO)
5. Ángel Casero (‘06 implicated in Operacion Puerto)

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

2001
1. Lance Armstrong
2. Jan Ullrich (‘06 implicated in Operacion Puerto)
3. Joseba Beloki (‘06 implicated in Operacion Puerto)
4. Andrei Kivilev
5. Igor González de Galdeano (‘06 implicated in Operacion Puerto)

2002
1. Lance Armstrong
2. Joseba Beloki (‘06 implicated in Operacion Puerto)
3. Raimondas Rumšas (Suspended in ‘03 for doping)
4. Santiago Botero (‘06 implicated in Operacion Puerto)
5. Igor González de Galdeano (‘06 implicated in Operacion Puerto)

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

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

2005
1. Lance Armstrong
2. Ivan Basso (Suspended in ‘07 for Operacion Puerto ties)
3. Jan Ullrich (‘06 implicated in Operacion Puerto)
4. Fransico Mancebo (‘06 implicated in Operacion Puerto)
5. Alexander Vinokourov (Suspended in ‘07 for CERA)
 
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
 
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....
 
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.
 
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.
 
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.
 
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.
 
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...
 
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.
 
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!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top