Armstrong formally charged by USADA

[yarravalleyplodder]

I don't know how seriously we can take testimony from these people. If you can't be honorable at the start, you can't be trusted at the end either.

the evidence was collected by a grand jury. lying carries the potential to be sent to jail and their testimony could have been tested in court (before the investigation was dropped), where they would have been subjected to very close scrutiny. you can't write those claims off as wild accusations.

But will their testimony be tested now or is it taken as fact by USADA?

Was the reason the US Attorney dropped the case because they thought their testimony wouldn't stand up to scrutiny? Doesnt it make them unreliable? and if yes doesnt that bring into question the basis for USADA's charges?

cant see any winners in this to be honest

[jules21]

The people who accuse him now had the chance to pipe up a LONG time ago.

to be fair, floyd landis has been screaming these accusations at the top of his lungs for quite a while. when the accusation didn't go away and were actually corroborated by hamilton at least, the federal investigation was finally launched. with the power of subpoena, this is rumoured to have amassed overwhelming evidence against Lance - particularly in the form of numerous former colleagues who have rolled over on him.

if those rumours are true, then Lance is probably sunk and USADA would have had little choice but to act. it's unfair to call it a witch hunt - they are bound to take action when such evidence comes to light.

the question is - what evidence do they really have? no point debating that. time will tell, but allegedly 'leaked details' suggest strong evidence against him.

It would have been justified during his TdF victories, or even just after... but it isn't. The train left, it ain't coming back.

what would be justified is an expose on how ingrained doping was (or is?) in the pro peloton and why Lance chose to dope. the general public are very ignorant of that. it's unfair to single Lance out - which he has said himself. on that i agree with him.

[jules21]

But will their testimony be tested now or is it taken as fact by USADA?

USADA don't have subpoena powers, i don't believe. so no, i wouldn't think they can test it other than asking for statements, which don't carry as much weight.

but those testimonies were already given under oath. they hold their own weight and i would imagine can be accounted for by USADA in their own right.

Was the reason the US Attorney dropped the case because they thought their testimony wouldn't stand up to scrutiny? Doesnt it make them unreliable?

no, the Attorney's investigation was into the crime of fraud - as the US postal team had anti-doping clauses in their contract with their sponsor. they never had a case against Lance for doping and never dropped one for that. this is the first time such a case has been brought forward against him (by USADA).

[Xplora]

what would be justified is an expose on how ingrained doping was (or is?) in the pro peloton and why Lance chose to dope.

and this is really the big thing, isn't it? If 75% of the peleton was doping, then they should just come out and say it. It is worse for the legacy and future of the sport IMO to say Lance was a cheat, because he's a legend and hero of the sport, than to say the whole lot of them were dodgy.

Do you think it would be worse for Australian cycling to have Cadel punished for doping, while most of the peleton around him was also doping and were simply not pursued, because of a lack of enthusiasm for their scalps? Or rather have the entire sport dragged through the mud for a while?

You have to punish rulebreakers to make an example of them, but you also have to acknowledge hypocrisy. Important enough to chase one guy, but not enough to chase the whole peleton? Ban the lot of them, I'll pick up a BMC and have a crack at the prologue, there are plenty of people who can ride a bike.

[rkelsen]

Do you think it would be worse for Australian cycling to have Cadel punished for doping, while most of the peleton around him was also doping and were simply not pursued, because of a lack of enthusiasm for their scalps?

The others have already been pinged haven't they? LA is the one we're hearing about because of his profile, but to them he is just another job.

[Xplora]

Do you think it would be worse for Australian cycling to have Cadel punished for doping, while most of the peleton around him was also doping and were simply not pursued, because of a lack of enthusiasm for their scalps?

The others have already been pinged haven't they? LA is the one we're hearing about because of his profile, but to them he is just another job.

To answer the first question, I don't know. The impression I'm getting is that most of them were not clean at the time, therefore taking LA's scalp won't clean up the sport, just like Contador's "punishment" would not deter professionals, except to ensure better alibis

[RICHARDH]

Cadel rode in some of Lance's Tour victories, how high could he have finished if everyone wasn't at "it" . The whole " they were all at it, the ships sailed , lets just let sleeping dogs lie" stuff is just crap. If this was anyone bar Lance , say some Italian / Spanish rider, then you would hear a peep about leaving it alone! If you read the document stating what the charges are it boils down to 1) Multiple witnesses from the team (not just Landis and Hamiltion ) 2) Bio- passport from 09/10. This isnt a witch hunt it's the USAnti Doping Agency being made aware of a highly organized doping program inside a team, with Team Man. and Team Dr.'s that are still active in the sport. It is massively relevant, a large portion of the riders did dope (not everyone!) Armstrong did on numerous times attack riders in the peloton for speaking out, he upheld the omerta and enforced it. Respect his achievements if you want, but he has to be upheld to the same rules as everyone else.

[Chuck]

It would have been justified during his TdF victories, or even just after... but it isn't. The train left, it ain't coming back.

Do you think it's possible that USADA have just acquired new evidence in light of the recent Federal investigation and are now acting on it ??

The decision to charge Armstrong is a courageous one (they would be taking some serious heat on this) and one that should be applauded by all those that want cycling cleaned up not decried. The argument that it happened too long ago or that "I'm over it" or we should all just move on is an unhealthy one and one that will lead to the same mistakes being made over again. The people involved need to be identified and removed from being involved in cycling. Should have happened to Riis and others also.

Cycling's image should have bottomed out in 98 but unfortunately EPO and Armstrong came along and now it appears that cycling is about to take it's biggest hit ever. We can thank those who put him on a pedestal and protected him and created someone who (in the mainstream) became bigger than cycling itself. An unhealthy situation for any sport, but a time bomb when it's all built on a lie.

I don't know what USADA have, but nothing involving Armstrong is a slam dunk. He has enormous resources, he'll be represented by the best and he doesn't blink. We'll never hear an admission from Armstrong.

Personally, as hard as it will hit cycling, I hope he goes down and I hope that everyone who assisted him and protected him goes down too. Maybe then cycling can trully start again. We already have athletes like Cadel who we can believe in and (to me anyway) the last few GT's have been believable, every one knackered, no magical performances. It actually looks like hard work and that's what it is. Cycling is a great sport it will survive.

And just for the record I come from the same position as RonK. Although I won't say I was a huge fan I wanted to believe in Armstrong and I would defend him to my non cycling mates. I too used the "never tested positive" argument but I now know how ridiculous that argument is.... Jones, Basso, Ullrich, Valverde etc etc.... they're ahead of the game The more I read the more overwhelming the evidence was.

I would urge people to check out the link posted by csy75....

http://velocitynation.com/content/inter ... l-ashenden

It's an excellent read and is very involved. Goes over lots of territory including the myth about Armstrongs physical gifts (compared with other elite athletes) and Armstrongs 99 Tour samples that contained EPO. It also casts doubt on the view that it was an even playing field and that none of his competitors were ever really cheated, especially the 99 Tour.

Also not sure why people think he's being singled out, Riis, Virenque, Pantani, Ullrich, Heras, Basso, Vino, Valverde.... some of the biggest names in our sport have all gone down. The evidence leads where the evidence leads.

[jules21]

Armstrong did on numerous times attack riders in the peloton for speaking out, he upheld the omerta and enforced it.

this is one of the most disgusting parts of the whole sordid drama. he literally persecuted riders who dared voice general opinions about doping, notably fillipo simeoni who testified against armstrong's former doctor and doping specialist michele ferrari. of course, these are all just unfortunate coincidences that unfairly paint armstrong as enforcer of a code of silence in the peloton about doping

[Chuck]

Armstrong did on numerous times attack riders in the peloton for speaking out, he upheld the omerta and enforced it.

this is one of the most disgusting parts of the whole sordid drama. he literally persecuted riders who dared voice general opinions about doping, notably fillipo simeoni who testified against armstrong's former doctor and doping specialist michele ferrari. of course, these are all just unfortunate coincidences that unfairly paint armstrong as enforcer of a code of silence in the peloton about doping

And yet he never spoke out against those who got busted, those who were trying to cheat him out of winning by using PED's while he remained clean. The only time he had a problem with Floyd and Tyler was when they implicated him.

Paul Kimmage's description of Armstrong (however upsetting to some) is accurate, it's been eating away at cycling for over a decade now.

[Xplora]

And yet he never spoke out against those who got busted

Cadel didn't have much to say about Schleck last year in the final mountain stage before the deciding TT either - they don't say much because they don't say much. Cadel might be smart enough to realise that he might be on the razor's edge of the rulebook as well. As I said to begin with - none of these guys could be considered "natural/normal". They are doing more than eating an extra can of tuna.

It's pretty simple - you don't test positive, you are considered clean. If they can't test for something, then don't make it illegal. It's not like computer hacking where the codes are constantly being beaten. It's chemicals and they don't change that much. There is no point making something illegal if you can't trace the infractions. They've been testing Lance for a VERY long time. I have lost interest in the testing regime because it seems that a lot of very impressive athletes just can't seem to appear on the stage without it. I could run the 100, or break the air for the peleton, but it wouldn't be nearly as entertaining as a bunch of dudes pumped to the eyeballs.

[Chuck]

but it wouldn't be nearly as entertaining as a bunch of dudes pumped to the eyeballs.

OK I know where you stand, no worries.

[Xplora]

but it wouldn't be nearly as entertaining as a bunch of dudes pumped to the eyeballs.

OK I know where you stand, no worries.

It's probably crass but a quick look at the cover of Zoo magazine sums up what spectators want - they are after results, rather than process. We watch the final product, and not the sacrifice and effort that it took to get there. Even Ben Johnson trained hard

[RICHARDH]

but it wouldn't be nearly as entertaining as a bunch of dudes pumped to the eyeballs.

OK I know where you stand, no worries.

It's probably crass but a quick look at the cover of Zoo magazine sums up what spectators want - they are after results, rather than process. We watch the final product, and not the sacrifice and effort that it took to get there. Even Ben Johnson trained hard

I disagree, I was discussing this with my Dad last night and he made the point and i agree with him that more and more the "Fans" (for lack of a better word) are not interested in results from doped riders. The push now is on teams to follow the Garmin model of actively crusading against doping, actively encouraging there riders to do it clean so that they appeal to the sponsors. This idea that these guys aren't normal is correct, but it doesn't follow that they should be doped to the eyeballs purely for entertainment is just wrong. Not only because we don't know the repercussions to there health from these practice's, the drugs effect different riders to a greater extent to other. If you born with the ability then that's something you own yourself and only hard work will bring that forward. Drugs skew this in a completely unethical way.

[greyhoundtom]

While it has nothing to do with the Lance Armstrong situation, I have no doubt that in the not so distant future, pro sports including cycling, are in for some torrid times in regard to trying to stem the tide of performance enhanced athletes taking home the winners purse.

Genetically engineered athletes within 10 years

"It's within the grasp of any graduate-level student in molecular biology," said Dr. Ted Friedmann, director of the gene therapy program at the University of California at San Diego and a member of the World Anti-Doping Agency's health and research committee.

"He or she could give you at least four different ways to do it. They could also tell you how to improve oxygen transportation or tell you how to engineer faster and stronger athletes. That, combined with the existence of huge amounts of money in sport and the pressures to excel, all suggests something will be done in this direction.

Gene therapy to enhance athletic performance will be much harder to detect. It could be injected directing into an organ and the effects could be limited to just that organ. So how to detect it? Take samples from every organ? Seems impractical.

Gene Therapy Will Still Become Widely Used For Athletic Purposes
Gene Screening For Recruitment: There is another way that genetic technology will change athletics: genetic screening to choose the most promising athletes for training and recruitment. This will be done for reasons other than pure performance potential. Proneness to injuries and ability to heal from injuries will surely be found to have strong genetic components. So an NFL football club faced with a difficult choice may well opt for the fellow who is less likely to be sidelined by injuries.

Repair That Improves Function: Another conflict will arise over the question of gene therapy for injury repair. It is inevitable that some gene therapy will be developed that will, for instance, repair a ligament that makes it even better than new. Many people in the general public will decide that if their ligament was weak enough to get injured in the first place why not apply a treatment that will make it stronger. Will an organization like the IOC allow athletes to do the same? if they do then injured athletes who have been treated and healed will be more capable than those who haven't yet suffered injuries.

Pro Sports and Ratings: I predict that there will be professional sports organizations that decide to allow it. Look at pro wrestling which is a sport that is as much about entertainment as it is about physical prowess. Also, look at the circuits travelled by former Olympic skaters. The audiences just want to see a beautiful show. The injuries experienced by pro skaters in their 30s or 40s will be dealt with using the latest in genetic therapy. The ability to pull in crowds and have good TV ratings will outweigh the sorts of concerns that motivate the managers of Olympic sports.
Ballet and Gene Therapy: There are occupations that are similar to athletics in that they place special demands on the body and cause much higher rates of career-threatening injuries. The best example is ballet. Injuries to muscles, ligaments, and tendons are frequent occurrences and too often career ending. I expect gene therapy to improve ligaments and tendons will become very common among ballet dancers.

Genetically Engineered Children: The IOC has banned gene therapy for athletic enhancement. But what happens when inevitably someone uses genetic engineering techniques to choose genes for their children before the children are even conceived? Are all such children to be banned from Olympic sports and other amateur sports? Parents may enhance their children by using genetic variations found elsewhere in the human population which they themselves do not possess. In these cases it will not even be possible to detect this sort of genetic engineering unless genetic samples are taken from the official parents and compared to the genetic sequence of the athlete.

[foo on patrol]

Call me stupid, but didn't he {Armstrong) win his last TDF in 05. He only road those last couple of races to support a new team and not win.

If he was taking drugs, then he must have had one hell of a Dr and chemist to help him avoid getting busted.

Like I have said before, when I see concrete evidence and creditable witnesses give testimony to his involvement and not these two bit wannabees that couldn't achieve
a high/higher standard of riding, then I will cast my venom on him.

Foo

[RICHARDH]

Call me stupid, but didn't he {Armstrong) win his last TDF in 05. He only road those last couple of races to support a new team and not win.

If he was taking drugs, then he must have had one hell of a Dr and chemist to help him avoid getting busted.

Like I have said before, when I see concrete evidence and creditable witnesses give testimony to his involvement and not these two bit wannabees that couldn't achieve
a high/higher standard of riding, then I will cast my venom on him.

Foo

Are people actually reading the reason his been charged?

[biker jk]

Call me stupid, but didn't he {Armstrong) win his last TDF in 05. He only road those last couple of races to support a new team and not win.

If he was taking drugs, then he must have had one hell of a Dr and chemist to help him avoid getting busted.

Like I have said before, when I see concrete evidence and creditable witnesses give testimony to his involvement and not these two bit wannabees that couldn't achieve
a high/higher standard of riding, then I will cast my venom on him.

Foo

You do know that in the 2009 TDF a UCI official had coffee with the Astana team management and didn't conduct the dope tests for nearly an hour? It seems that Lance Armstrong's donation to the UCI paid off.

You don't believe that George Hincapie, considered a "brother" by Lance Armstrong, is a credible witness? The six EPO positives from 1999?

[Xplora]

Yep. That's why we are sceptical. Would you trust these witnesses with identical relationships to Lance if this was a murder trial? People convicted of the same crime, people with axes to grind, people with far too much time to craft a story and collaborate before giving testimony, with virtually no forensic evidence despite years of checking the DNA of the crime scene? If the guy is guilty, then let that come out, but you're off your tree if you believe this is a clean cut case.

[RICHARDH]

So far the we have all assumed that Landis and Hamilton have testified, but who are the other 8 and why are you assuming that they are less credible than Armstrong? 10 people singing the same song backed by bio passport info from 09/10.

[biker jk]

Nice article in Forbes magazine which comes to the most logical conclusion on whether Lance Armstrong was a doping cheat.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/richkarlgaa ... ic-figure/

[biker jk]

So far the we have all assumed that Landis and Hamilton have testified, but who are the other 8 and why are you assuming that they are less credible than Armstrong? 10 people singing the same song backed by bio passport info from 09/10.

Because those testifying against Lance are jealous of his success due to high cadence, reconnoitoring the stages, large heart and dedicated training.

[AUbicycles]

I watched a fascinating documentary about the Mexican labs that produce performance enhancing drugs - it wasn't cycling related, infact had the Jamaican Usain Bolt in mind who is in a similar position, allegations but no proof.

One of the key things I took out was that with doping programs, athletes have a strict plan how to dope how to avoid detection. It has a lot to do with the length of time substances can be detected (eg, 6 hours, 8 hours). This goes some way to explain how someone with a perfect record can be suddenly caught. Anti-doping is a game of playing catchup in many aspects.

The Rupert Guiness Lance Armstrong doping article commented on the fall-out regardless of the end result, though that cycling is on the increase so may not be a major hiccup.

[RICHARDH]

I heard a interview on a local sports radio show with Michael Johnson, in it he openly admitted he took performance enhancers and that everyone he raced against. He seemed to be upset that he got stripped of his gold from something he didn't take and was blaming Carl Lewis for setting him up. One of the interviewers asked if he thought Bolt was using he just laughed and said he would rather to say.

[The_Eggman]

Are people actually reading the reason his been charged?

Indeed. He hasn't been charged for'99, he's been charged for activities in 2009-10. And while he may not have won the tour during that time, but he certainly racked up results most riders would love on their palmares - 1 stage win in the TdF, 3rd in the TdF, 2nd in tour of Switzerland, 3rd in tour of Luxembourg.

It does surprise me how many people don't want to get to the bottom of this. It seems he has a case to answer, so let's see him answer it.