[Zevo]

Originally Posted by troutman

The Lance Armstrong fallout - questions, denials and doping reactions
http://www.sportsscientists.com/2012...ce+of+Sport%29

The problem is, if you choose to believe Armstrong, that it's a witch-hunt, then you are also a conspiracy theorist, because the only way you can explain all the witnesses who are willing to testify is to say that they are part of a massive conspiracy against him. One that spans the Atlantic Ocean, includes former team-mates, journalists, doctors, administrators, soigneurs, strangers and mechanics. A few people are "easy" to dismiss - Landis and Hamilton are not credible, that's easy. But if USADA had ten more lined up, it becomes more and more difficult to dismiss.

The "never failed a test in 500" defense is irrelevant because it is a) exaggerated, b) shown up as meaningless by the anti-doping climate of the Armstrong era, c) possibly false anyway.

"Let's legalize doping, make it a free for all, and see what happens". I don't want that, I don't know that many do, and so therefore, doping control has a crucial place as a deterrent, to protect the rights of those who do not wish to dope.

We know others doped too. Many have been caught. To allow an athlete to get away with it for that reason is just not good enough. If there is a rule, then it must be enforced as many times as is necessary.

Is it not a bit ridiculous to change the winner of a sport 12 years after the fact? Yes it is, but that's still better than never knowing, and never understanding who the true champion is.

Who do they give the title to though? How do they know the next guy was clean, or the next guy after that? If pretty much everyone was doping and not everyone got caught, how do they know anyone was clean.