Lance Armstrong to be charged with doping?

[puffnstuff]

Without actually going and reading the 1000 pages...
This, to me, has proved one thing, that it is a bit of a vendetta by the USADA and here's why...what have they done to these riders that testified? The ones that admitted to cheating? And now compare it to what they have gone after Armstrong for, the stripping of titles, lifetime ban etc. They should be holding all these guys to the same standard shouldn't they? And they aren't. Just MHO

[Hack&Lube]

Originally Posted by Azure

Outside of the 'testimonies' from the other riders, the other 'evidence' the USADA is pretty weak.

They say he avoided the tests, which sounds completely absurd. Wasn't the most tested athlete ever? I mean either the testing protocal was properly adhered too, or it wasn't. How can he avoid tests?



Really? That is the best they can come up with? He didn't answer the door when the testers came? Why wasn't here reported?



Again, this screams of incompetence by whoever was in charge of the testing. Did Lance retire there? Pretty sure he lived and trained in Texas during the off season. Sounds like a lame excuse.

Then they claim he took undetectable drugs. Well, maybe he did, and maybe he didn't, but there is nothing but hearsay to say that he did. Last time I checked that didn't count as evidence in any first world country. Oh right, this is the USADA we are talking about.

All the 'evidence' they have is hearsay and allegations. Nothing concrete. People can believe what they want, but they can't 'prove' anything because he never actually tested positive for whatever reason.

Why should anyone believe any cyclist who has had their charges or allegations dropped in exchange for their 'eye-witness' account? I sure don't. Lance was a giant ######bag during his career, so I'm sure there are a lot of people who never liked him.

Still doesn't count as evidence though. The entire thing is 'weak.' And rather hilarious given how the USADA was trying to play it up.

And you've already seen and evaluated all this evidence already by your expert analysis? That Lance simply "passed tests" of the time exonerates him? The technology just wasn't there and smart riders, teams, and their medical accomplices were always pushing the limits to see what they could get away with.

I'm not expert on this but I've been Googling around about how Lance was able to pass these 500-600 tests his defense team always falls back onto. The results are partially avoiding them with the methods you describe, and others which were more sophisticated.

Transfusions existed in the 70’s and 80’s, to be supplanted by EPO in the mid 90’s, which was a much simpler procedure. EPO, then undetectable [supposedly it was only detectable in urine for 4 days after taking it but had a 40 day benefit in the body], was curtailed by the 50% hematocrit threshold until a test was developed in 2000, at which time its use began to diminish and blood transfusions reappeared.

A test for homologous transfusion (using someone else’s blood) was developed in 2004, but autologous transfusion (using one’s own blood) remained largely undetectable until the development of the Athlete Biological Passport in 2008. While many believe that the sport is much cleaner thanks to the Passport program, athletes were in fact engaged in sophisticated measures to mask blood transfusions.

[Flamenspiel]

Re the comments about hearsay, it is not "hearsay" it is direct testomony, clearly 26 people are not lying about their firsthand account of druglife on the team.

Yes, its hard for the true believers to let go of Armstrong but unless you want to say, yes he cheated but its ok you are living in denial or just having fun with people in the thread.

[Rutuu]

[QUOTE=Azure;3891716]Outside of the 'testimonies' from the other riders, the other 'evidence' the USADA is pretty weak.

They say he avoided the tests, which sounds completely absurd. Wasn't the most tested athlete ever? I mean either the testing protocal was properly adhered too, or it wasn't. How can he avoid tests?



Really? That is the best they can come up with? He didn't answer the door when the testers came? Why wasn't here reported?



Again, this screams of incompetence by whoever was in charge of the testing. Did Lance retire there? Pretty sure he lived and trained in Texas during the off season. Sounds like a lame excuse.

Then they claim he took undetectable drugs. Well, maybe he did, and maybe he didn't, but there is nothing but hearsay to say that he did. Last time I checked that didn't count as evidence in any first world country. Oh right, this is the USADA we are talking about.

QUOTE]

The Canadians working for a large Australian company in Australia did all of the above to avoid drug tests. The people in charge of drug testing performed drug testing on Australian athletes for the olympics, so they were the best the country has to offer.

Not a single Canadian ever tested positive...and I know the real circumstances not to be true.

Drug testing/worrying about drug testing takes up less than 0.01% of my life and we figured out a system to beat it; I believe all the allegations are true against Lance. Proving it beyond a resonable doubt I guess is a bit grey for some folks, but not this guy.

Liestrong. Ha.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by Hack&Lube

And you've already seen and evaluated all this evidence already by your expert analysis? That Lance simply "passed tests" of the time exonerates him? The technology just wasn't there and smart riders, teams, and their medical accomplices were always pushing the limits to see what they could get away with.

I'm not expert on this but I've been Googling around about how Lance was able to pass these 500-600 tests his defense team always falls back onto. The results are partially avoiding them with the methods you describe, and others which were more sophisticated.

If there was concrete evidence that Lance was doping the USADA would have released it already. Instead all they have are allegations and accusations from teammates that have been basically blackmailed into testifying in exchange for reduced 'charges' for their own doping.

Yes he did pass the tests. No that doesn't mean he never doped. It just means that there is no true way to 'test' and 'prove' what he did and didn't do.

I honestly don't care either way. If he was doping, like everyone else, then everyone else was on a level playing field and he still kicked them around. I just find it strange that the USADA would go on such a witch-hunt over something they can't prove.

Didn't the US government drop charges because they lacked evidence to actually put together a case?

[Azure]

Originally Posted by Flamenspiel

Re the comments about hearsay, it is not "hearsay" it is direct testomony, clearly 26 people are not lying about their firsthand account of druglife on the team.

Yes, its hard for the true believers to let go of Armstrong but unless you want to say, yes he cheated but its ok you are living in denial or just having fun with people in the thread.

26 people who have been 'pushed' into confessing in exchange for what? The USADA clearly pressured them to say what they are saying.

[troutman]

Originally Posted by Flamenspiel

Re the comments about hearsay, it is not "hearsay" it is direct testomony, clearly 26 people are not lying about their firsthand account of druglife on the team.

+1 - "hearsay" is often misunderstood.

[troutman]

Reasoned Decision:

http://d3epuodzu3wuis.cloudfront.net...edDecision.pdf

This Reasoned Decision includes a summary of the overwhelming evidence that
demonstrates that Mr. Armstrong doped throughout the majority of his professional cycling
career. Among the evidence in this case are the sworn statements1 of more than two dozen (24+)
witnesses, including fifteen (15) professional cyclists, and a dozen (12) members of Armstrong’s
cycling teams, including eleven (11) former teammates and his former soigneur (masseuse).
Nine (9) of the professional cyclists were, like Mr. Armstrong, clients of Dr. Michele Ferrari and
have firsthand knowledge of his doping practices.

The evidence in this case also includes banking and accounting records from a Swiss
company controlled by Dr. Ferrari reflecting more than one million dollars in payments by Mr.
Armstrong, extensive email communications between Dr. Ferrari and his son and Mr. Armstrong
during a time period in which Mr. Armstrong claimed to not have a professional relationship
with Dr. Ferrari and a vast amount of additional data, including laboratory test results and expert
analysis of Mr. Armstrong’s blood test results. This evidence is incorporated by reference into
this Reasoned Decision as if fully set forth.

While this Reasoned Decision summarizes overwhelming evidence of Mr. Armstrong’s
doping that would have been presented at the hearing had Mr. Armstrong not refused to
challenge the charges against him, it necessarily cannot include all of the evidence that would
have been presented at such a hearing. Had there been a hearing even more evidence would have
been presented, including, evidence obtained through arbitration panel subpoenas and potentially
evidence from government investigations.

Furthermore, at a hearing USADA would have been able to examine on the record and
under oath members of Mr. Armstrong’s inner circle and others with knowledge of Armstrong’s
doping who refused to come forward or were unwilling to speak with USADA absent a
subpoena. Mr. Armstrong’s refusal to participate in a hearing prevented the testimony of many
other witnesses from being heard.

None of the evidence USADA summarizes in this Reasoned Decision was obtained from
the United States federal law enforcement investigation involving Mr. Armstrong. After the
announcement by U.S. District Attorney Andre Birotte on February 3, 2012, that he was
discontinuing the criminal investigation of Armstrong’s conduct, USADA formally requested
copies of non-grand jury evidence from the case.2 However, no documents have been received
to date. As a result, none of the evidence assembled by USADA has come from federal law
enforcement.

The most critical evidence assembled by USADA and discussed in this Reasoned
Decision has come from Mr. Armstrong’s former teammates and former employees of the United
States Postal Service (“U.S. Postal Service” or “USPS”) and Discovery Channel cycling teams
who decided that it was the right thing to do for clean sport to come forward and provide
evidence to USADA regarding what they knew. As a consequence of a number of courageous
riders willingness to break the Code of Silence—the “omerta”—after being approached by
USADA, by late May 2012 USADA concluded it had more than enough evidence to proceed
with charges against former USPS and Discovery Channel Team Director Johan Bruyneel,4
former USPS and/or Discovery Channel doctors Pedro Celaya,5 Luis Garcia del Moral6 and
Michele Ferrari7 and Team Trainer Jose “Pepe” Marti8 and against Mr. Armstrong.

USADA also reached out to Mr. Armstrong, communicating with four of his attorneys
and giving Mr. Armstrong the opportunity to come in and sit down with USADA and cooperate
with USADA’s investigation as had many of Mr. Armstrong’s teammates. Mr. Armstrong,
however, refused to meet with USADA, setting in motion the sequence of events that led to
USADA’s charges and ultimately to Mr. Armstrong’s sanction by USADA in accordance with
the rules.9

[oldschoolcalgary]

there are riders who testified that never were caught. Therefore, there is no bribery, no "carrot". The guys like Landis or Hamiltion...did they ever race again? Did they ever keep their titles?

In fact the first 'whistleblowers' against Lance got nothing but scorn and harsh rebuke. What was the payoff for them?

People that still cling to the belief that Lance is clean, wouldn't believe it even if there was video showing Lance injecting.

ESPN more or less captures the difference between between believers and non believers pretty succinctly...

http://espn.go.com/espn/otl/story/_/...-whether-doped

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by Flamenspiel

Re the comments about hearsay, it is not "hearsay" it is direct testomony, clearly 26 people are not lying about their firsthand account of druglife on the team.

Yes, its hard for the true believers to let go of Armstrong but unless you want to say, yes he cheated but its ok you are living in denial or just having fun with people in the thread.

Its only in N America people thought Armstrong was clean, in europe, where they actually like and know about cycling it was always assumed he used, after all everyone else throughout the whole history of the tour used, why would Lance be any different.

The rest of the world looks on in incredulity at the yanks destroying their own hero in a sport that has always accepted PEDS as part of the culture, and this, I believe, is part of the reason Lance has acted the way he has, I think in his mind he has played the game by the rules, writen and unwriten, and so should be left in peace.

[oldschoolcalgary]

Originally Posted by afc wimbledon

Its only in N America people thought Armstrong was clean, in europe, where they actually like and know about cycling it was always assumed he used, after all everyone else throughout the whole history of the tour used, why would Lance be any different.

The rest of the world looks on in incredulity at the yanks destroying their own hero in a sport that has always accepted PEDS as part of the culture, and this, I believe, is part of the reason Lance has acted the way he has, I think in his mind he has played the game by the rules, writen and unwriten, and so should be left in peace.

While i don't disagree about there being drug use in the Tour for a long time before Lance, the culture is changing, and is no longer acceptable following the Festina fiasco.

Big big names have been caught and suspended. Guys like a Pantani, Ulrich, Contador, Zulle, Landis, Hamilton....the list goes on and on

Now it begs the question, why no other multiple winner has been pursued like Lance? No one questions Indurain's accomplishment. Is it because he's european? I can't say....I know LeMond has never been accused of doping and was buried by the media as being jealous and spiteful when he did dare question Lance's record.

To me, Hincapie is the smoking gun. I cannot fathom why he of all people would point the finger at Lance. Unless, of course, he is telling the truth.

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by oldschoolcalgary

While i don't disagree about there being drug use in the Tour for a long time before Lance, the culture is changing, and is no longer acceptable following the Festina fiasco.

Big big names have been caught and suspended. Guys like a Pantani, Ulrich, Contador, Zulle, Landis, Hamilton....the list goes on and on

Now it begs the question, why no other multiple winner has been pursued like Lance? No one questions Indurain's accomplishment. Is it because he's european? I can't say....I know LeMond has never been accused of doping and was buried by the media as being jealous and spiteful when he did dare question Lance's record.

To me, Hincapie is the smoking gun. I cannot fathom why he of all people would point the finger at Lance. Unless, of course, he is telling the truth.

Because he is the only american cyclist the average yank has any knowledge of and is being persued by an american agency out to prove they are a player in the sports world, no one in the US would give a crap if they proved Indurian was doping (he was, and was caught), in fact I doubt most would even know who he was, Armstrong though is a scalp worth having.

[Vulcan]

Originally Posted by afc wimbledon

Its only in N America people thought Armstrong was clean, in europe, where they actually like and know about cycling it was always assumed he used, after all everyone else throughout the whole history of the tour used, why would Lance be any different.

The rest of the world looks on in incredulity at the yanks destroying their own hero in a sport that has always accepted PEDS as part of the culture, and this, I believe, is part of the reason Lance has acted the way he has, I think in his mind he has played the game by the rules, writen and unwriten, and so should be left in peace.

While I agree with you, still doping shouldn't be allowed. Besides being a health question athletes shouldn't have to put up with,

In fact, some argue that it was Armstrong's doping that caused his infamous battle with testicular cancer. Medical evidence suggests that steroids such as testosterone and EPO may cause significant damage to the body, including an increased risk of cancer, particularly of the testicles. Witnesses have come forth with information that Armstrong admitted doping to his doctors and was aware that he may have contributed to his illness.

a lot of competitions probably come down to who has the best drugs, and that's just a f***** up situation.

http://www.examiner.com/article/us-a...pped-of-titles

[troutman]

The lectures from European cycling "experts" are arrogant and tiresome.

[Yasa]

Silly question; why is blood doping illegal?

[troutman]

Originally Posted by Yasa

Silly question; why is blood doping illegal?

http://blogs.menshealth.com/health-h...ing/2011/06/01

Why Doping is Banned
During transfusion tainted blood can be put back into the body, and often the people transfusing the blood aren’t trained doctors. Putting tainted blood into your body or letting your friend transfuse your blood rank pretty high on the list of best ways to make it to the emergency room.

The EPO method is no better. Once the percentage of red blood cells rises above 50 percent, the blood becomes thick and viscous like molasses. This can lead to a heart attack or stroke. In fact, after EPO was developed in the late 1980s, 20 European endurance athletes died in a span of 4 years, and most experts suspect that they died of heart failure due to thick blood.

http://www.knowswhy.com/why-is-doping-illegal/

[Yasa]

So, if I understand correctly, doping is illegal due to unsafe procedures and resulting health risks. What would happen if they allowed doping/EPO by trained professionals? It seems to me that doping happens regardless. Would it not be better to regulate it in an attempt to make it safer?

[oldschoolcalgary]

Originally Posted by afc wimbledon

Because he is the only american cyclist the average yank has any knowledge of and is being persued by an american agency out to prove they are a player in the sports world, no one in the US would give a crap if they proved Indurian was doping (he was, and was caught), in fact I doubt most would even know who he was, Armstrong though is a scalp worth having.

Or maybe he just cheated.

Like 11 team mates have testified to?

Or people working in the team staffs?

How about the tests, retroactively done, that show he was using drugs during the first tour win?

Or money trails to a doctor already with a record of prescribing these enhancements?

No, the only reasonable conclusion is that these guys want to gain rep points and props from the world media...?

ummmm oooookaay?

[Rathji]

Originally Posted by Yasa

So, if I understand correctly, doping is illegal due to unsafe procedures and resulting health risks. What would happen if they allowed doping/EPO by trained professionals? It seems to me that doping happens regardless. Would it not be better to regulate it in an attempt to make it safer?

I think that statement is misleading.

I am guessing it is primarily banned because it is a method of improving your performance, not because you can kill yourself by using it.

[Yasa]

Originally Posted by Rathji

I think that statement is misleading.

I am guessing it is primarily banned because it is a method of improving your performance, not because you can kill yourself by using it.

I think the safety reasons make more sense than performance improving reasons, to me anyway. Doesn't money give a cyclist a huge boost in potential ability? Lance Armstrong is sponsored by USPS and Discovery Channel, I think, giving him access to all sorts of crazy training methods and equipment that other teams probably don't. That could be seen as an unfair advantage to others.

Where's the line when it comes to being competitive?