Lance Armstrong done______

[rufus001]

Re: Lance Armstrong done contesting drug allegations

7 wins in a row against a bunch of future drug cheats all before EPO was tested for properly. I don't believe in Superman.

 

[CDR_Glock]

It's a travesty that they are having these relentless attacks on Lance. Whatever the case may be, to carry out the wins was a feat. It takes a great degree of dedication, ambition and hard work. 7 times he won. 500 times he was tested. He beat cancer and served as an inspiration For those who fought and are still fighting cancer. Live Strong, Lance.

You are still a champion in my eyes.

 

[cnjl3]

Re: Lance Armstrong done contesting drug allegations

I think Lance Armstrong is one of the most amazing athlete I have seen in my lifetime.
This article nails it on the head as far as I'm concerned.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/sport...940afa-ee0a-11e1-afd6-f55f84bc0c41_story.html

Great article.

 

[orbital]

Re: Lance Armstrong done contesting drug allegations

USADA is not, repeat not, a U.S. government agency or a court. They don't follow rules of evidence, don't presume innocence, don't give the accused due process, they don't even name the witnesses against him. They are no better than the kangaroo courts in the old Soviet bloc. In fact, they are the U.S. anti-doping representative only because they figured out how to do it before anyone else did. If I, or anyone else on this forum, had figured out how to run this absolutely perfect scam first then we would be the USADA.

I'm no fan of Armstrong, but this is a total railroad job.

+

USADA is attempting to get people to think they're credible, by trying to use Armstrong.
...along with having no authority or credibility,, the UCI thinks they are complete tools.

I'v followed cycling most my life, what many people don't know is how the French tried their damnedest to prove Armstrong was doping.
It was a never ending saga.

In the end, the French could do nothing more than respect his unusual ability.

 

[WoodMan]

Re: Lance Armstrong done contesting drug allegations

By contrast to Armstrong: Ryan Braun, the 2011 National League MVP tested positive for PEDs in the offseason and yet is widely considered "clean." Why? Because he is subject only to the sanctions of the MLB drug testing policy and not the USADA. Braun's positive testing sample suffered minor mishandling: the testing official could not get the sample to the shipper in time for shipping the same day and so stored it in his own refrigerator overnight. Due to this technicality, Ryan Braun beats the rap.

Armstrong, the most tested athlete in the history of drug testing, never tested positive either in or out of competition. The current allegations of positive tests are based on old samples, some more than a decade old. It is widely known that most, if not all, of these samples were improperly stored, labeled, and secured. Nor is it definitively known how the age of the sample affects the accuracy of current tests.

Again, not a fan of Armstrong, only a fan of justice.

 

[Monocrom]

Re: Lance Armstrong done contesting drug allegations

+

The most drug tested person on the planet is saying 'enough is enough' on drug allegations.
Important,,this is NOT an admission of guilt.

NYPD gets sued often when officers are alleged to have done something wrong. Sometimes they settle for an undisclosed sum. And, never actually admit to any wrongdoing. Is the fact that the plaintiff is getting a ton of money from the NYPD an admission of guilt? No. Is it seen as such by pretty much every civilian in NYC. Yes, yes it is.

Is the fact that Armstrong threw in the towel going to be seen as an admission of guilt by many? Yes, yes it is.

EDIT:

I heard that he has been stripped of all his titles and medals. Can anyone confirm this?

 

[rufus001]

Re: Lance Armstrong done contesting drug allegations

The reality is people will believe what they want to believe.

 

[will]

Re: Lance Armstrong done contesting drug allegations

I heard that he has been stripped of all his titles and medals. Can anyone confirm this?

The USADA stripped him of the titles, But, correct me if I am wrong. They do not have the authority to do so.

By the way . he took second in a mountain bike race on Saturday.

Here is a link to a news article..
In a nutshell, USADA can't strip him of the tour wins because they did not award him the wins...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/sport...f7d382-ee04-11e1-afd6-f55f84bc0c41_story.html

 

[iapyx]

Does the term 'Witch Hunt' ring a bell here? There is no physical proof of doping. Only the say so of 10 unnamed riders. .......

That is not the only reason why they say he is guilty. There's a lot more. E.g Lance always knew ahead of drug/dope test when they were about to test him. He delayed which gave hime like 20 minutes to cover things up. And he did this each time. He was surrounded by experts in hiding the use of dope. I think he was so determend to be perfect in covering up the use of dope that he only thinks one thing: There has never been found any proof of the use of dope in my blood, so therefore I am not guilty. But he forgot about all the other ways that proof he used dope. But that simply doesn't count for him, but unfortunately for him it does count for USADA.

I hope that they will save a bloodsample they can test so that in the future when new methods have been developed new proof that doesn't allow any room for discussion will say wether he is guilty or innocent

 

[will]

Re: Lance Armstrong done contesting drug allegations

I hope that they will save a bloodsample they can test so that in the future when new methods have been developed new proof that doesn't allow any room for discussion will say wether he is guilty or innocence.

The French tried that a few years back. The samples had not been stored or secured in a way that would have prevented unauthorized people from access.

Here again, not an expert, but 20 minutes to cover up? is that possible?

Is it possible that in the future they will want tissue samples from kidneys and liver?

USADA is a US committee, They do not have the authority to strip him of an award issued by the International Cycling Union, or even the Tour de France.

 

[rufus001]

Re: Lance Armstrong done contesting drug allegations

USADA is a US committee, They do not have the authority to strip him of an award issued by the International Cycling Union, or even the Tour de France.

Yes they do. All these groups are signatories to a drug code that requires them to abide by each others rulings. Unless they of course appeal the ruling. Which would open up a whole other can of worms.

 

[StarHalo]

Re: Lance Armstrong done contesting drug allegations

Clarifying - Armstong is not being accused of using drugs, but rather blood doping; the process of transfusing blood prior to an event, or use of a hormone that causes the body to produce more blood cells. There's no test for this as of now, aside from searching athletes' training areas for the necessary medical equipment.

Another point to ponder is artificial blood; if you need blood at a local hospital and they don't have your particular type, one option is to try artificial blood, which can work across many types. But this is only Artificial Blood 1.0 - if you can create it, then you can improve on it over time. This means the artificial blood of the future will be able to hold way more oxygen than standard old human blood cells. Runners doing multiple Ks at full sprint, swimmers doing lengthy races without ever raising their head out of the water, etc will all be possible, at speeds that are currently not. So will athletes who receive better blood simply no longer be able to compete? Will there need to be entirely new sporting leagues for the enhanced?

 

[z17813]

Re: Lance Armstrong done contesting drug allegations

nearly everyone dopes at that level. yes it is bad but an actual fact that will never be controlled.

I think this is a good point that isn't discussed enough because while scandals always get press coverage people always want to see records broken and people achieving more and more.

IMO with the rewards on offer for highly successful athletes there are always going to be a lot of people that will do anything to increase their chances of achieving that level of success.

Does the term 'Witch Hunt' ring a bell here? There is no physical proof of doping. Only the say so of 10 unnamed riders.

Most legal cases are built on circumstantial evidence rather than physical evidence, "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence."
In the US in murder trials where no body has been found the conviction rate is still over 90%.
A great many people have been found guilty in cases without physical evidence and less than 10 witnesses testifying against them.

One only has to read about the BALCO scandal to see just how many athletes who were using performance-enhancing drugs routinely passed drugs tests.
Marion Jones was one of the most drug tested athletes in the world. She passed test after test and maintained that she did not use performance enhancing drugs. Later, when potentially facing prison for perjury, she later admitted to having taken PEDs for most of her professional career and having lied about it.

The fact that Marion Jones was a drug cheat does not prove that Lance Armstrong is a drug cheat, simply that being tested for drugs a lot and saying that you have not used drugs does not = not having used drugs

Many of the cyclists that Armstrong beat have been implicated in drugs scandals or faced suspensions or bans as a result of drug use

http://www.brettluelling.com/post/3435612945/armstrongs-tdf-victories

Cant they just take a blood sample from each and every racer at the beginning and/or end of each race, and test it, but also keep some of the sample for future testing once they figure out how to detect the newest drugs on the scene at any one time? That way they can always check to see if racers were using some new cheating substance that they werent aware of and didnt know how to test for til a year later or whatever....

There a couple of hundred racers competing each year, with A and B samples taken at each drug test and multiple tests per racer, plus long term secure storage for thousands and thousands of samples for future testing, this is a massive and expensive undertaking.
With drugs like synthetic testosterone able to leave an athlete's body within six to eight hours even with exhaustive testing many cheats will still avoid detection.
In the case of an athlete who is caught as a result of a sample given years earlier and stripped of their titles they may still have received millions of dollars from endorsements in this time which they will keep. Many people are willing to risk much greater penalties for much lesser rewards.

Also while sports bodies are opposed to drugs use in their sports they are also aware that whenever an athlete is caught using PEDs it damages the reputation of the sport. Perhaps for that reason as much as any other some of the drug testing protocols in various sports have left a lot to be desired.
In Major League Baseball for example, while steroids were banned in 1991 it took more than a decade to introduce league wide PED testing. Even in the last week two MLB players have received bans for PED use, suggesting that it is still commonplace in this sport.

The reality is people will believe what they want to believe.

Agreed

Clarifying - Armstong is not being accused of using drugs, but rather blood doping; the process of transfusing blood prior to an event, or use of a hormone that causes the body to produce more blood cells. There's no test for this as of now, aside from searching athletes' training areas for the necessary medical equipment.

While blood doping did originally refer only to the process you describe, these days it more commonly refers to use of the genetically engineered hormone EPO, which increases the percentage of red blood cells in blood thus improving endurance and aerobic capacity.
Many cyclists who have been banned for taking PEDs have tested positive to taking EPO.
EPO testing was not available at the time of Armstrong's first Tour wins and the tests for EPO are not considered as sophisticated as many other drug tests.

 

[will]

Re: Lance Armstrong done contesting drug allegations

Most legal cases are built on circumstantial evidence rather than physical evidence, "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence."
In the US in murder trials where no body has been found the conviction rate is still over 90%.
A great many people have been found guilty in cases without physical evidence and less than 10 witnesses testifying against them.

In the case of no body being found, there is certainly evidence that the person is no longer around. No credit card transactions, no social security activity, no contact with family or friends. There is a reasonable assumption that something happened to the person. It could be that the person simply 'ran away'. There may have been threats, there may have been any number of things that would indicate that some harm came to that person.

In the case of doping, the only circumstantial evidence here is that he won the race. Comparing circumstantial evidence in a murder case to sports doping is like comparing apples and oranges, not the same thing.

Anyhow, my opinion is that he was treated unfairly by the USADA

( There was a story on the news here in NY about this whole situation, In summary, the USADA recommends to the International Cycling union to strip Armstrong, They will then review and make a decision whether to go along with the USADA or not. Other news sources have mentioned that the two organizations are at odds with each other. I honestly do not know how much of this is true, it seems that most seem to agree that this is what will happen. )

 

[z17813]

Re: Lance Armstrong done contesting drug allegations

The murder example was not meant to be a direct comparison (and I agree with you that it isn't) but was an example that in cases with much more serious consequences, convictions can be recorded (and usually are) even without direct physical evidence that an offence has taken place.

If it is reasonable to assume that something has happened to a person because they are no longer around, no credit card activity etc.
then couldn't you also argue that in Armstrong's case it's reasonable to assume that if numerous people who have said that Armstrong both admitted to using PEDS and gave them PEDs (and have been banned for life as a result of their statements) that it is reasonable to assume that Armstrong used PEDs?

I have not seen any proof that he has used PEDs but IMO there is certainly circumstantial evidence and many cases have been made on strong circumstantial evidence alone.
I believe that he is innocent until proven guilty and that while I would like to see anyone who is innocent continue to fight any accusations that are brought against them, and challenge the validity of any evidence that their accusers would use against them, his choice to stop fighting hasn't lead me to draw any conclusions regarding his guilt or innocence. It is nonetheless disappointing.

I agree that the USADA has aggressively pursued Armstrong and that anytime an organisation with a multi million dollar budget is willing to spend years pursuing anybody, even someone with the means that Armstrong has to defend himself, it is an inherently difficult battle.

I also believe that irrespective of whether Armstrong did use PEDs that he is an extremely talented athlete and that the amount of money his organisation has raised for cancer research has made a positive difference in the lives of a great many people.

 

[Obijuan Kenobe]

Re: Lance Armstrong done contesting drug allegations

It has all been said, but I'll type it again.

Nearly everyone in professional cycling dopes legally. Whatever is legal at the time is done. Doctors are paid and consulted to help them find legal ways to gain an edge. This does not even acknowledge those that have managed to get away with illegal ways of doping. And there are likely plenty that have risked both.

This pseudo legal battle is all based on the false premise that ONLY LANCE DOPED, WHILE EVERYONE ELSE WAS PLAYING FAIR. This assumption is ridiculous. But he was guilty before this even left the office.

For me, he won...in the face of every other competitor doing anything and everything (legal and otherwise) to win...he won. There were plenty of cheaters in all those years from 1999 through 2005, and somehow the USADA is privy to the facts regarding exactly who.

This is pure unadulterated hogwash. There is something fishy going on here behind the scenes. He might be a real creep of a guy, but he was a hell of a cyclist.

obi

 

[orbital]

Re: Lance Armstrong done contesting drug allegations

That is not the only reason why they say he is guilty. There's a lot more. E.g Lance always knew ahead of drug/dope test when they were about to test him. He delayed which gave hime like 20 minutes to cover things up. And he did this each time. He was surrounded by experts in hiding the use of dope. I think he was so determend to be perfect in covering up the use of dope that he only thinks one thing...

Please provide your source..

Clarifying - Armstong is not being accused of using drugs, but rather blood doping; the process of transfusing blood prior to an event, or use of a hormone that causes the body to produce more blood cells. There's no test for this as of now, aside from searching athletes' training areas for the necessary medical equipment.

Another point to ponder is artificial blood; if you need blood at a local hospital and they don't have your particular type, one option is to try artificial blood, which can work across many types. But this is only Artificial Blood 1.0 - if you can create it, then you can improve on it over time. This means the artificial blood of the future will be able to hold way more oxygen than standard old human blood cells. Runners doing multiple Ks at full sprint, swimmers doing lengthy races without ever raising their head out of the water, etc will all be possible, at speeds that are currently not. So will athletes who receive better blood simply no longer be able to compete? Will there need to be entirely new sporting leagues for the enhanced?

True StarHalo, he's accused of doping,,
outside of insane high altitude training, just not alot of natural ways to increase oxygen in blood & that takes a manufacturing process.
...so I used the word drug in title not to confuse anyone

Yes they do. All these groups are signatories to a drug code that requires them to abide by each others rulings. Unless they of course appeal the ruling. Which would open up a whole other can of worms.

rulings?....where's the beef :kiss:

 

[will]

Re: Lance Armstrong done contesting drug allegations

z17813 and obi

I agree with both of you.

If you are into conspiracy theory - this might be one good example. Starting with the French a number of years back. To a large extent, he has been way too successful and a very visible target.

Interesting side note to all this . Alberto Contador was banned for 2 years after his win in the Tour de France. The story is that he ate some beef that had been from a cow that had been fed steroids. The amount detected had been so insignificant that it would have had no improvement on his performance. The Spanish cycling authority was going to ban him for a year, The Prime Minister of Spain made a statement in public that there should be no penalty due to the minute amount detected. The Spanish Cycling authority, in a move of power due to the Prime Ministers statement banned him for 2 years. Why - because they could. Power corrupts.... Andy Schleck finished second and has stated the Contador was the winner, Lance Armstrong finished third...

It seems that here in the US that most of the public is behind Armstrong and the USADA is a power hungry bunch of - well - insert your own derogatory term....

 

[rufus001]

Re: Lance Armstrong done contesting drug allegations

rulings?....where's the beef :kiss:

In English?

 

[iapyx]

Please provide your source..

NRC Handelsblad
I hope you can read Dutch