Lance Armstrong appears finally to have run out of rope. (Read 2696 times)


Hawt and sexy

    I'm touching your pants.

      http://www.cbc.ca/sports/cycling/story/2012/08/23/sp-cycling-lance-armstrong-doping-appeal-charges.html

       

      Yep, stripping him of his Tour Titles and banning him for life. 

      "Don't feel like running today...suck it up and run ...you're an athlete." (John Stanton, founder & owner of The Running Room)

       

      Three half marathons later, I got a number. Half Fanatic #9292. :)

        Well, that's one way to preserve his foundation and legacy, such as it is.  If he doesn't challenge the USADA, then they don't put on their evidence, whatever it may be.   Yes, that will leave lots of folks with lots of questions, but he's used to questions.  And questions are much easier to deal with than evidence.


        Hawt and sexy

          No, I think he did what he felt he had to do to keep the evidence from being public record. It's an admission without an admission. It's just weird to spend all those resources for years fighting allegations to just drop the fight when it counts.

          I'm touching your pants.

            I have a basic question - USADA can only ban him from cycling competitions or can they also ban him from events where cycling is a part (such as a Triathlon)?

            I dont sweat. I ooze liquid awesome.


            Hawt and sexy

              There is a separate organization for tris, but they are bound to uphold USADA findings.

              I'm touching your pants.

                I'm a little behind the times here, so excuse my ignorance.  I remember watching the TDF and rooting for him, but also believing he had to be doped.  Hell, I believe that everyone that wins that thing has to be doped in some form or fashion.  After he stopped chasing the win streak, I quit watching, but I remember hearing about a bunch of riders being caught in the subsequent years.  My questions are:  Did he ever get caught?  Are they saying there is a positive test that was just never released (or never got leaked to the press)?  Or is the evidence all based on what some guys said (which might be true, but should also be corroborated with some positive test)?

                 

                Can someone get me up to speed?  I don't like to read.

                There was a point in my life when I ran. Now, I just run.

                 

                Well, fuckers

                He still stands

                 

                The Diary of a Once-ran.


                Prince of Fatness

                  I prefer beer over popcorn, but I am ready..  Have at it folks.

                   

                  Semi-retired.

                    AIUI the main evidence against him is the testimony of ex team-mates and others. He's never failed a test (although there has not been a test for EPO for very many years).

                     

                    I hear that USADA is going to make all the evidence that they have public...

                      No, I think he did what he felt he had to do to keep the evidence from being public record. It's an admission without an admission. It's just weird to spend all those resources for years fighting allegations to just drop the fight when it counts.

                       

                      It's not a fair process and, as others have pointed out, that's just tough luck because it's the process that exists.  It's designed to deal with scientific questions (a samples, b samples and the like).  As shown in this thread, most of us have made our minds up and come to grips with whatever we believe.  I think the whole charade is stupid and mean-spirited.  Lots of others think it's long overdue.  We're past the point where anyone will really change their mind.  Que sera.  You win.  

                       

                      Wonder which "clean" cyclists will default into those titles?  Jan Ulrich, Ivan Basso, Joseba Beloki.  You know, the guys who really competed fairly and were deprived of honest wins by Lance's 15-year reign of cheating. 

                       

                      I'm going to send a new donation to the Armstrong Foundation.  

                        damn you Lance...................

                         

                        Oh well, gave up on this whole circus long ago.

                         

                        Would be interesting to know how he passed all of those tests. Money buys the best doctors, I guess.

                         

                        Not a Lance hater, but the shine has been muddied for far to long.

                         

                        Now if I could just find my Livestrong  bracelets, collectors items right?

                         

                        Very long winded lawyer speak for I give up from Lance. I wish him well in the future.

                          Yawn.

                           

                          Lance said back in May that he wouldn't waste any more time on this. I'm glad to see he's making good on that. 

                           

                          Sure he doped. Most of them did. Many still do.

                           

                          and...

                           

                          I don't like the idea of stripping his titles only to give them to other dopers.

                           

                            I'm a little behind the times here, so excuse my ignorance.  I remember watching the TDF and rooting for him, but also believing he had to be doped.  Hell, I believe that everyone that wins that thing has to be doped in some form or fashion.  After he stopped chasing the win streak, I quit watching, but I remember hearing about a bunch of riders being caught in the subsequent years.  My questions are:  Did he ever get caught?  Are they saying there is a positive test that was just never released (or never got leaked to the press)?  Or is the evidence all based on what some guys said (which might be true, but should also be corroborated with some positive test)?

                             

                            Can someone get me up to speed?  I don't like to read.

                            While stepping over the question of whether I think he doped ... my understanding is that the evidence consisted primarily of personal testimony from 10-12 people, at least half admitted dopers (or under strong suspicion).  USADA refused to reveal the identities of the full contingent, let alone what they'd actually say in the arbitration proceeding.  The physical evidence is limited to a handful of results of old samples re-tested with new protocols; the results don't test for the presence of PEDs per se, but generate a profile that's viewed as normal/abnormal.  Armstrong's old samples apparently tested out as "abnormal".

                             

                            An equal issue is that the arbitration process isn't viewed as being a fair fight for a charged athlete.  I've not looked into it deeply, but apparently other sports bodies and even some arbitrators describe it as skewed against the athlete.

                             

                            Given USADA's "evidence blackout", the slanted venue, and the finality of the arbitration decision ... I can see why an athlete wouldn't be eager to enter a process seemingly so stacked against him.

                            “Everything you need is already inside.” -- Bill Bowerman

                              So, going forward...

                              Say you're a talented, competitive cyclist. Multiple choice question.

                              1. The sport is still dirty and I must use PEDs in order to compete. I just have to be as skilled at concealing it as I am at cycling.

                              2. The sport is still dirty, and there are undoubtedly still cheaters out there, but I'm not going to risk getting caught. I'll probably lose as a result.

                              3. After what happened to Lance, I'm not going to risk getting caught, and I don't think many others will either, so we are back to a pretty fair competition.

                              4. I would never have cheated in any case.

                               

                               

                              Enjoy your beer, Mr. Finn.

                              Well at least someone here is making relevance to the subject.

                              DoppleBock



                                4. I would never have cheated in any case.

                                 

                                http://a-big-horse.blogspot.com/ 

                                2013 Goals ~ Mar < 3:00, 5M < 29, 10k < 35