Lance...time to stir the pot..what say you

[powdahbonz]

I'm of the opinion that Lance may not be "completely" innocent through all of these years. I'd like to think that he is just a freak of nature, a complete animal on the bike and beat his opponents into submission. There are those that have always wanted to pull him down-he's not the the nicest-arrogant, teammate-wise, probably wasn't the greatest...Landis is a whiney b!tch. Cycling is inherently a polluted sport and probably always will be. The announcements last night and today seem to be calcualted on Lance's part to ensure that the questioning, suspicions, investigations stop at that-suspicions. Without trial, court or public opinion, the complete truth will remain vacant. Everyone will weigh in on fact and fiction, did he or didn't he. maybe he loses the titles, maybe not. USADA has made it a mission to discredit. Now, they still won't have the truth. They accomplish nothing. He passed what he needed to, when he needed to and that wasn't good enough. Too bad really-I'd like to think he's more innocent than guilty. At the end of the day, titles or not, still one of the greatest athletes in the sport. I'd give my left nu...well...maybe not, to have that lung capacity and stamina.

[floBoot]

Powdahbonz

Similar thoughts to you...maybe not entirely innocent...however, I am a fan of his :) and I won't change being a fan regardless of whether he's Pharmstrong or not...

[Allee]

I'm having a great time reading some of the internet comment on this stuff. My thoughts on it are, you never caught the guy. Did he cheat? Probably, but he was doing what he needed to do to play the game. Can you prove it? No. The testimony of a bunch of already discredited drug losers doesn't cut it for me, sorry. And as for stripping him of his Tour wins and giving it to the next guy in line - who was probably just as guilty, pull his B test - that accomplishes nothing.

They say they have bunch of tests from 2009 and 2010 that "prove he blood doped". As one of my co-workers says, what does that have to do with his Tour wins from the 2000's? That's like saying that we caught you drink driving last month, so we're going to revisit that accident you had a decade ago because you "must" have been drink driving then, too. That's ridiculous.

It's going to be interesting to see what the UCI has to say - as Armstrong points out, they have to make a case to the UCI to strip his Tour titles. If I was the UCI, I'd be asking for the hard evidence ... the vibe coming from UCI at present seems to be decidedly unsympathetic to the USADA hoopla.

It's a shame that they can't just let it go. They guy has single handedly given cycling an international profile, and the work he's done with Livestrong is amazing. It's another Kenneth Starr vs Bill Clinton - some nobody with a chip on his shoulder wants his 15 minutes of fame by taking down the big guy, and in the end, nobody gives a s**t.

And when they asked Lance for a comment he said "Thanks everyone. I had a ball."

[Corey]

The news on the radio made it sound like he admitted to it and is definitely going to be stripped of his Tour wins. After reading a few stories I'm more on Lance's side. He tested ok at the races, so leave the titles in place. I'd be stunned if they could test everyone's results to the same standards and not find something wrong.

I think everyone knows the top competitors aren't doing this just based on nature's gifts... They're in a grey area where it's hard to define what's a drug and what's a nutritional supplement. This smells like a witch hunt to me.

[davekempmeister]

Dick Pound of WADA and those at USADA want their very own Pete Rose, IMO. They want the most visible symbol of cycling for the past 10 years discredited so it's all sewn up neatly. Cycling and many other int'l sports cannot rehab an image or how the public perceives the sport without such a sacrificial lamb/fall guy. Lance stood on top of many podiums (always passed analysis) with 2nd and 3rd place finishers who were dirty. The logic that seems to be in play suggests that if 2nd and 3rd were dirty then so too must the 1st place finisher.

I think Lance's tact is correct and that at this point he's a pawn in a battle between large entities jockeying for authority and jurisdiction.

Edited August 28, 2012 by davekempmeister

[philw]

I read the book and I thought he sounded like a competitor. It seems odd then that he should stop competing against this. The man in the book would never stop. Unless of course he knew he was going to lose. I'm happy to wait and see how it works out. But if he cheated he needs taking down and out.

I'm English so I'm still in shock about Bradley Wiggins winning the Tour, but if they find he cheated us all, then the same applies.

The fact that cycling's never really sorted out the drugs business kind of annoys me.

[bruincounselor]

I heard on the radio today the he tested positive in 99 for EPO - but got off on a technicality, and another time for testosterone, and another time for ?? - but was given a retroactive exemption for medical use. It was on NPR and I was riding my motorcycle so details may be a bit off. My point is that while he says he's never tested positive (which is technically correct because he wasn't found "Guilty") The reality is that his doping regimine was more sophisticated than the the testing for it at the time. Keep in mind this is a multi-million dollar enterprise and (especialy at the time) everyone was doing it. I think the second place finishers of each of his TDF victories has without exception been implicated in doping (only one has so far be exonereated - again, on a technicality). His accomplishemnts are many and significant; but he's no angel (cue Allman Brothers).

[Jack M]

What is the point? Practically EVERYONE behind him was CAUGHT for doping/enhancing, so who the heck do they think should get the medals?

Edited August 25, 2012 by Jack Michaud

[bruincounselor]

This has some of the particulars I refer to; but I was listening to a commentator about it:

http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2012/08/24/160002576/anti-doping-chief-armstrong-knows-truth-is-holding-on-to-baseless-soundbites

[bruincounselor]

My point? He's tested positive on several occasions that were thrown out on technicalities. It's like a person who gets caught going fast on the highway, but the officer didn't get a radar gun on him in time and therefore can't give him a ticket - everyone knows the law was broken, but no penalty.

They finally got the radar gun on Lance and he has finally stopped saying he's 100% clean. I'm glad he's not lying anymore; I repsect him more now than ever. Honesty is a good thing. Just because everyone else is doing it doesn't make it righ, and clearly lots of other people have already been caught. I don't understand why people say this is a witch hunt? He's still (well, was) a professional athlete and subject to the rules of tri....

[Beckmann AG]

I don't understand why people say this is a witch hunt?

The 'witch hunt' reference dates back to the farcical trials that took place in Salem Massachussetts back in the day. The USADA action more or less follows the same format.

Witch is to say that those in power chose to persecute and try societal outliers, relying solely on the questionable hearsay testimony of fearful neighbors and colleagues.

Rather than actual evidence.

There was no chance of justice for the accused. Once the finger was pointed, the game was over, and 'death' in one form or the other, was guaranteed.

That's how you 'run the table', so to speak.

In this case, Armstrong is simply doing the same thing as J.T. Kirk when faced with the Kobayashi Maru scenario: he's changing the game in which he has been set up to fail.

His refusal to participate in his own immolation is not an admission of guilt. He is simply swapping his titles for the privilege of not being tried.

Rather, arbitrated; by which he would most certainly be found guilty. Guilty, not of doping; but for being too good at his craft. Witch more or less amounts to the same thing. After all, nobody could be that good for that long unless they were cheating.

Simply inconceivable. Particularly in this age of infinite data collection and processing power.

Of note:

Valid tests have been available for nearly all of the viable ergogenic aids for a long time, and those substances have a habit of sticking around for more than 15 minutes. Their effect on the subject is quantifiable, and often readily apparent.

Basic tests for EPO using established athlete baselines have revealed any number of cheats.

Generally speaking, those caught doping make the mistake of having a really good day on the bike, ala FLandis, etc, with subsequent testing of the stage winner revealing the truth of the situation.

As with his training and race day output, Armstrong tended to be exceptional in the consistency of his performance. Which suggests that if he was 'using', he must have been 'using' day in, day out.

All the way back to when he won his million dollar trifecta.

Given that Armstrong has been tested in and out of competition likely more than any other athlete on this planet, and had no 'red flag' results that couldn't be accounted for, one has to assume that he raced clean. Or; everyone else caught doping is exceptionally stupid/careless; or Armstrong is velly, velly clever, with a massive network of cheat behind him.

And a veritable Batcave of stealth technology for administration.

Though you can't keep that kind of secret without a whole lot of payola. Or murders.

In which case, the money/blood trail should reveal his cohorts.

And if that were the case, there would be no need for the USADA to trot out a Greek chorus of disgraced athletes to make their case.

If they had a case, it would have been over already. They have the truth, and they don't like it, so they need to put on a show.

Perhaps LA is guilty of being more than an exceptional athlete and strategist. Proof, however, is not derived in the court of public opinion, or from the voices of the convicted. It has to come from the same place as all other doping verdicts. Witch is to say, the laboratory.

The Irony in all of this is that the USADA is using sizeable resources (which could go to better things) to chase after a man who has done more for the greater good, both in and out of sport, than they ever will.

Which makes their judgment, and punitive measures, somewhat irrelevant in the grand scheme of things.

A notion that has not been lost on Mr. Armstrong.

[Jack M]

There it is, right there. Thank you Erik.

[davekempmeister]

if fans are disheartened by the drugs use and the labs are always a step behind in analysis, just wait until GENE THERAPIES and BIOLOGICS come into play (or, have they already?).

people will have to dispense with a lot of these "purity" notions.

[bruincounselor]

How anyone can say he's clean when test results demonstrate otherwise?

The EPO test was done considerably after the '99 victory and could not be used at the time to strip him due to procedural issues. The testing people found a way to prove he had EPO in his system that Lance and his team thought would never exist. As I understand it these are not just blood level tests, but tests for the substance in question that had been banned for some time in '99. This is an astounding level of fantasy - are you arguing that because it's been a few years he shouldn't be prosecuted? That doesn't seem reasonable, especially when he's still competing in a (different) sport with doping rules too. Did you read the article I posted above? In my mind the doping has ruined the sport while making it difficult (impossible seems more appropriate - see above chart) for the clean, honest men to compete - this is really sad.

How about "Top Fuel" cycling? Let them use whatever they can find short of gasoline and motors. Let them kill themselves with whatever the best chemists can cook up. It would be interesting to be sure. Even that plan has ethical issues too. Darn.

We probably need to agree to disagree. Maybe we can take some turns together sometime.

Edited August 27, 2012 by bruincounselor

[Beckmann AG]

Jack,

“I’m with the Government; I’m here to help…”

In my mind the doping has ruined the sport while making it difficult (impossible seems more appropriate - see above chart) for the clean, honest men to compete - this is really sad.

Surely you realize that doping has been a part of bicycle racing since the days of the handlebar moustache and the P-Far?

And since that time, the clean and honest man has been doing fine. He may not make the podium, or receive the accolades and cash involved, but he’s most likely doing the best he can, with what he has, in the circumstances in which he finds himself.

And there’s something quietly heroic about that. Which partially explains the popularity of bicycle racing among the ‘common man’ over the last century.

Granted, it’s always a disappointment to throw enthusiasm into a sport, only to realize over time, in small increments, that the game is rigged.

Perhaps the sadness has more to do with being conned, rather than with the con itself?

Speaking of sad: Sad is the pervasive and corrosive nature of money on professional sport. The wealth involved is so vast that the late Carl Sagan couldn’t begin to quantify it.

If the illusion of a level playing field is maintained, the tide of wealth rises. If that illusion is damaged, there is the threat of monetary loss.

The Spice must flow.

And that is where the USADA and their crusade come in. Their job is to make it appear that something is being done in the name of ‘clean’; on behalf of the fans, advertisers, team owners, and lastly the participants.

So long as there has been competition, there have been cheaters. Taking down another top-level cyclist won’t change that, but it will create the impression of an effort towards change. And that impression ensures that the man on the street will spend a part of his paycheck on vicarious athletics.

The testing people found a way to prove he had EPO in his system that Lance and his team thought would never exist.

Malice aforethought? Really?

To think that Armstrong, (and/or his organization) would be oblivious to how doping developed and devolved elsewhere is rather comical.

Bear in mind that misuse of EPO is not unique to cycling. Fur instance, in the ‘80s (or therabouts) it became a scourge in horse racing. Summarily, tests were developed for its detection, and the cheater focus shifted to other means.

Horse racing is still dirty, as it always has been, but it’s now more a matter of subtlety.

Regarding Lance, the question of guilt, or innocence, isn’t really the point.

It’s the probability of either, and the ability/desire of the USADA to fairly assess that probability.

[bruincounselor]

Thanks Beckmann, just what I needed tonight.

[davekempmeister]

Roger Clemens, criminally charged, facing jail time and loss of legacy/dignity, wins acquittal in federal court with high standards (beyond reasonable doubt) regarding rules of evidence. Jury trial, nonetheless. Spends tons of money, of course. Case largely hinged on the testimony of one person with suspect motives and diminished credibility. Personally, I think of Roger Clemens no differently now than ever before. Mike Piazza probably doesn't either.

Lance, not criminally charged but facing a long and costly fight to retain titles and legacy, opts not to respond and denies USADA an audience and a forum for their show. Tantamount to a default judgement, USADA strips titles and rewrites the record. Lance Armstrong doesn't somehow become someone else in my mind because of all of this.

Who's it better to be, Clemens or Armstrong?

Does USADA make a move for restitution of the winnings ($), also?

Were The Tour, the IOC or some other entity to go to the World Court of Arbitration for Sport to claim that the USADA overstepped jurisdiction, wouldn't that be the ideal scenario for Armstrong?

Wouldn't they in essence be funding and fighting his fight for him?

[Neil Gendzwill]

This article is a long read but worth it. It lays out some pretty reasonable arguments as to why it's important that organizations like USADA continue to fight drug cheats, and why it's important to go after guys like Lance.

[trailertrash]

It's the "who shot JR question" question of the decade.

He's as guilty as the day is long but so where the rest and he beat them.

[philw]

The Salem witch hunts were far from the first or the last. The term's modern usage seems inappropriate in this case though: "witches" were obviously innocent, Lance is not.

If you're happy to follow races between different medical teams, I can see you'd be cool with Lance's dope. If it's ok, then why did Lance openly and fulsomely lie about it for so long? It's a double standard, and not ok for precisely that reason.

[Neil Gendzwill]

He's as guilty as the day is long but so where the rest and he beat them.

That argument doesn't wash with me. It's supposed to be about who can race the best, not who can dope the best. IOW if you have the resources to do the best job of doping and hide your activites the best, then you have an extra advantage over not just clean athletes, but other dopers.

[kieran]

time to give this thread a shot in the arm.

[nils]

Please search the previous forum archives ( is it possible?)....that topic was already hot in 2003-2004...it will be nice to re-read some of the categorical affirmations that were said then by some fellow carvers explaining that Lance is among america's greatest sport hero.....I remember receiving small flaming when with a few others we gave the opinion that he was suspicious...( as well as the others in the top 20).....will be fun to read now :)

N.

ironic Nike ad :

Edited January 18, 2013 by nils
added vid

[Jack M]

He needs to disappear for a loooong time or forever, a la Pete Rose or Michael Richards (Kramer).

[lowrider]

He needs to disappear for a loooong time or forever, a la Pete Rose or Michael Richards (Kramer).

Only way out now is to marry a Kardashian.