HOLY showtime!!! Amstrong accepts life ban!!!

open topic, for anything cycling related.

Re: HOLY showtime!!! Amstrong accepts life ban!!!

Postby rustguard » Fri Aug 31, 2012 12:54 pm

so 1999 samples tested positive for EPO but procedures were so corupted the results were unusable. Well interesting because LA actually won the TDF more than once so that leaves at least another 6 years of B samples for testing under rigorus standards? If EPO can now be detected and If LA is so guilty why has nothing surfaced?

If I had to bet either way I dont think the odds would be much different. Until the witnesses are named and testimony given its impossible to offer a verdict. I have read all the links in this thread and so far; everything is based on the testimony of Landis and Hamilton. Which was not quoted in any links that I read in this thread.
Everything else was 100% opinion or guilt by assosiation.

Funny that Lindy Chambelin was brought up because people really were so venimous and nasty in there opinions during that case. My advice is that if you paport to being an inteligent character at least drop the spitefulness from your condemnation, be patient, more will be revealed.
rustguard
 
Posts: 1324
Joined: Thu Jul 10, 2008 2:31 am
Location: Perth, WA

by BNA » Fri Aug 31, 2012 1:22 pm

BNA
 

Re: HOLY showtime!!! Amstrong accepts life ban!!!

Postby biker jk » Fri Aug 31, 2012 1:22 pm

Australia's Dr Ashenden replies to Phil Liggetts defence of Armstrong. Rustguard might observe that there was no test for autologous doping (reinfusing own blood) during the Armstrong era. Also note what the French anti-doping agency has said about delays in testing Armstrong after stages which provided him with enough time to beat the tests.

http://nyvelocity.com/content/features/2012/filthy-business-indeed
User avatar
biker jk
 
Posts: 2693
Joined: Tue Nov 17, 2009 5:18 pm
Location: Sydney

Re: HOLY showtime!!! Amstrong accepts life ban!!!

Postby clackers » Fri Aug 31, 2012 2:11 pm

rustguard wrote:so 1999 samples tested positive for EPO but procedures were so corupted the results were unusable.


I'm not sure where you're getting that from, Rustguard.

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

rustguard wrote: Well interesting because LA actually won the TDF more than once so that leaves at least another 6 years of B samples for testing under rigorus standards?


We'd love to be able to re-test all the samples from pro-racing, but which labs would still have them? The 1999 ones were a special case.
User avatar
clackers
 
Posts: 1973
Joined: Mon May 16, 2011 10:48 am
Location: Melbourne

Re: HOLY showtime!!! Amstrong accepts life ban!!!

Postby Alex Simmons/RST » Fri Aug 31, 2012 2:36 pm

rustguard wrote:so 1999 samples tested positive for EPO but procedures were so corupted the results were unusable. Well interesting because LA actually won the TDF more than once so that leaves at least another 6 years of B samples for testing under rigorus standards? If EPO can now be detected and If LA is so guilty why has nothing surfaced?

You need to read a bit more on testing for EPO, and how easy it is to avoid detection.

rustguard wrote:If I had to bet either way I dont think the odds would be much different. Until the witnesses are named and testimony given its impossible to offer a verdict. I have read all the links in this thread and so far; everything is based on the testimony of Landis and Hamilton. Which was not quoted in any links that I read in this thread.
Everything else was 100% opinion or guilt by assosiation.

As far as I know, the case involves direct witness testimony from about 10 people, as well as testing data right up to and including 2010.
User avatar
Alex Simmons/RST
Expert
 
Posts: 3443
Joined: Fri May 02, 2008 3:51 pm

Re: HOLY showtime!!! Amstrong accepts life ban!!!

Postby RonK » Fri Aug 31, 2012 2:50 pm

rustguard wrote:Until the witnesses are named and testimony given its impossible to offer a verdict.

The witnesses have been named and the testimony given, and the USADA has reached it's verdict. Understandably they didn't release this information to you (or anyone else not directly involved) for your considered opinion.

And let me remind you once again of the charges.

The anti-doping rule violations for which Mr Armstrong is being sanctioned are:

1) Use and/or attempted use of prohibited substances and/or methods including EPO, blood transfusions, testosterone, corticosteroids and masking agents.

2) Possession of prohibited substances and/or methods including EPO, blood transfusions and related equipment (such as needles, blood bags, storage containers and other transfusion equipment and blood parameters measuring devices), testosterone, corticosteroids and masking agents.

3) Trafficking of EPO, tes-tosterone, and corticosteroids.

4) Administration and/or attempted administration to others of EPO, testosterone, and cortisone.

5) Assisting, encouraging, aiding, abetting, covering up and other complicity involving one or more anti-doping rule violations and/or attempted anti-doping rule violations.’


Charges 2,3,4 and 5 are more serious than the first, and don't rely on testing. It's these charges for which LA gets a lifetime ban. The first is only worth two years.
Cycle touring blog and tour journals: whispering wheels...
User avatar
RonK
 
Posts: 5369
Joined: Mon Aug 24, 2009 2:08 pm
Location: Brisbane, Queensland

Re: HOLY showtime!!! Amstrong accepts life ban!!!

Postby RICHARDH » Fri Aug 31, 2012 4:08 pm

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/usada-responds-to-liggetts-claims-of-bribery-in-armstrong-case

I've never really liked Liggett much but this is just stupid. The man is far past it he should just retire while he has any credibility (though i think that horse may have bolted ). He has clearly grabbed a copy of Armstrong's press release and started regurgitating. Ashenden as usual is quite spot on

Also David Millar's take

"Everybody should watch the @PhilLiggett interview. For me he is not the "Voice of Cycling".”

And Vaughters

'@PhilLiggett...Yes, I lied about doping. I actually didnt dope. A bunch. And stuff...Yeah...That's the ticket!'
We are stuck with technology when what we really want is just stuff that works (Douglas Adams)
User avatar
RICHARDH
 
Posts: 1306
Joined: Tue Sep 16, 2008 2:46 pm
Location: adelaide

Re: HOLY showtime!!! Amstrong accepts life ban!!!

Postby find_bruce » Fri Aug 31, 2012 4:51 pm

RonK wrote:The witnesses have been named and the testimony given, and the USADA has reached it's verdict. Understandably they didn't release this information to you (or anyone else not directly involved) for your considered opinion.

I must have missed that Ron, can you tell me where any of the people directly involved, such as Armstrong et al or the UCI have been given the names of witnesses or the testimony. So far as I am aware the only thing anyone outside of the USADA have been given is the charging document, described by the Federal Court as so vague and unhelpful it would not pass muster in any court in the United States.
Image
User avatar
find_bruce
 
Posts: 3777
Joined: Mon May 09, 2011 8:42 pm
Location: Sydney

Re: HOLY showtime!!! Amstrong accepts life ban!!!

Postby toolonglegs » Fri Aug 31, 2012 5:10 pm

It doesn't need to "pass muster" in any court in the USA.
USADA haven't released anything because there are still cases pending.
Pretty simple really.
Image
User avatar
toolonglegs
 
Posts: 14405
Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2007 7:49 pm
Location: Somewhere with padded walls and really big hills!

Re: HOLY showtime!!! Amstrong accepts life ban!!!

Postby Xplora » Fri Aug 31, 2012 5:49 pm

toolonglegs wrote:It doesn't need to "pass muster" in any court in the USA.
USADA haven't released anything because there are still cases pending.
Pretty simple really.

Which in common pub language is "soft/weak/gutless"

Sure, it's all legal stuff, and that's fair enough, but you don't go public with all this stuff if you don't have the ability to actually put your money where your mouth is.
Xplora
 
Posts: 6176
Joined: Fri Dec 10, 2010 11:33 pm
Location: TL;DR

Re: HOLY showtime!!! Amstrong accepts life ban!!!

Postby alex » Fri Aug 31, 2012 6:22 pm

Xplora wrote:
toolonglegs wrote:It doesn't need to "pass muster" in any court in the USA.
USADA haven't released anything because there are still cases pending.
Pretty simple really.

Which in common pub language is "soft/weak/gutless"


then what is pub language for "not going to arbitration because it would make all the evidence public very quickly/had enough of fighting"?
if i get killed while out on my bike i dont want a 'memorial ride' by random punters i have never met.
alex
 
Posts: 1000
Joined: Fri Nov 28, 2008 9:12 am

Re: HOLY showtime!!! Amstrong accepts life ban!!!

Postby Alex Simmons/RST » Fri Aug 31, 2012 7:08 pm

Xplora wrote:
toolonglegs wrote:It doesn't need to "pass muster" in any court in the USA.
USADA haven't released anything because there are still cases pending.
Pretty simple really.

Which in common pub language is "soft/weak/gutless"

Sure, it's all legal stuff, and that's fair enough, but you don't go public with all this stuff if you don't have the ability to actually put your money where your mouth is.

I suspect you are suffering cognitive dissonance.
User avatar
Alex Simmons/RST
Expert
 
Posts: 3443
Joined: Fri May 02, 2008 3:51 pm

Re: HOLY showtime!!! Amstrong accepts life ban!!!

Postby familyguy » Fri Aug 31, 2012 8:20 pm

Not sure if this velocast podcast has been linked/mentioned yet. Apologies if it has, I found it interesting.

http://velocastcc.squarespace.com/race- ... ition.html

Jim
User avatar
familyguy
 
Posts: 5067
Joined: Wed Apr 16, 2008 2:30 pm
Location: Cromer, NSW

Re: HOLY showtime!!! Amstrong accepts life ban!!!

Postby mrs slocombe's pussy » Fri Aug 31, 2012 9:28 pm

[quote="rustguard"]so 1999 samples tested positive for EPO but procedures were so corupted the results were unusable. Well interesting because LA actually won the TDF more than once so that leaves at least another 6 years of B samples for testing under rigorus standards? If EPO can now be detected and If LA is so guilty why has nothing surfaced?

the tests were not corrupted.....he didn't get done for testing of the 1999 B samples because you have to fail both the A and B sample......that's the whole point of the B sample, to ensure nothing was done wrong with the A sample. Tyler Hamilton got off on a positive result because the B sample had been frozen and hence destroyed.

weird that the corrupted results resulted in 6 positives for Lance and 6 for the rest of the whole peloton....what are the chances!
mrs slocombe's pussy
 
Posts: 24
Joined: Wed Dec 21, 2011 3:51 pm

Re: HOLY showtime!!! Amstrong accepts life ban!!!

Postby twizzle » Fri Aug 31, 2012 10:20 pm

Alex Simmons/RST wrote:
Xplora wrote:
toolonglegs wrote:It doesn't need to "pass muster" in any court in the USA.
USADA haven't released anything because there are still cases pending.
Pretty simple really.

Which in common pub language is "soft/weak/gutless"

Sure, it's all legal stuff, and that's fair enough, but you don't go public with all this stuff if you don't have the ability to actually put your money where your mouth is.

I suspect you are suffering cognitive dissonance.


:lol:

Sent from my iThingy...
I ride, therefore I am.
...real cyclists don't have squeaky chains...
User avatar
twizzle
 
Posts: 6382
Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2008 11:45 am
Location: Taking a break.

Re: HOLY showtime!!! Amstrong accepts life ban!!!

Postby bigfriendlyvegan » Sun Sep 02, 2012 10:44 pm

Apologies if it was posted before, but here's Lance's PA's view on Lance: My Life with Lance Armstrong
User avatar
bigfriendlyvegan
 
Posts: 3134
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2008 1:18 pm
Location: Denistone, NSW

Re: HOLY showtime!!! Amstrong accepts life ban!!!

Postby Ross » Mon Sep 03, 2012 1:57 pm

^^Not much substance in that article. Why are all these people suddenly coming out to say stuff like "We saw Lance doing EPO back in 199X/20XX". Where were these people back then, why not report this to authorities back then? Not saying Lance is innocent, but then of course I have no evidence either way, only what I read in the media.
Image
User avatar
Ross
 
Posts: 3779
Joined: Sat Nov 07, 2009 7:53 pm

Re: HOLY showtime!!! Amstrong accepts life ban!!!

Postby bigfriendlyvegan » Mon Sep 03, 2012 2:28 pm

Ross wrote:^^Not much substance in that article. Why are all these people suddenly coming out to say stuff like "We saw Lance doing EPO back in 199X/20XX". Where were these people back then, why not report this to authorities back then? Not saying Lance is innocent, but then of course I have no evidence either way, only what I read in the media.


Anderson actually did do it back then. So did a few others. They're coming out now saying "See, we weren't lying!"
User avatar
bigfriendlyvegan
 
Posts: 3134
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2008 1:18 pm
Location: Denistone, NSW

Re: HOLY showtime!!! Amstrong accepts life ban!!!

Postby zero » Mon Sep 03, 2012 3:25 pm

mrs slocombe's pussy wrote:weird that the corrupted results resulted in 6 positives for Lance and 6 for the rest of the whole peloton....what are the chances!


I'm going to guess that winning 3 time trials and a mountain stage gets you more drug tests. The other particularly high profile rider (winning flat stages) during the race was Cipollini and his samples would be more likely to test positive to hairgel.

This was also not about "corrupted samples", there simply was not an epo test in 1999, the b-samples were retested later when there was. Alone they are probably not enough to convict the guy due to the due processes of the times, but they are absolutely sufficient reason to start an investigation and seek sufficient overall evidence for a conviction.
zero
 
Posts: 2635
Joined: Tue Jan 05, 2010 1:54 pm

Re: HOLY showtime!!! Amstrong accepts life ban!!!

Postby Xplora » Mon Sep 03, 2012 3:53 pm

Alex Simmons/RST wrote:
Xplora wrote:
toolonglegs wrote:It doesn't need to "pass muster" in any court in the USA.
USADA haven't released anything because there are still cases pending.
Pretty simple really.

Which in common pub language is "soft/weak/gutless"

Sure, it's all legal stuff, and that's fair enough, but you don't go public with all this stuff if you don't have the ability to actually put your money where your mouth is.

I suspect you are suffering cognitive dissonance.

Not at all, just stating that the legal process occurs in the public space, and if you cannot bring all the evidence into the public space with you when you make an accusation against a famous figure (using weasel words like cases pending etc) then you should keep that accusation to yourself. Resolve your cases, then .....not very nice bit removed (be nice).... :mrgreen:
Xplora
 
Posts: 6176
Joined: Fri Dec 10, 2010 11:33 pm
Location: TL;DR

Re: HOLY showtime!!! Amstrong accepts life ban!!!

Postby toolonglegs » Mon Sep 03, 2012 4:02 pm

If it were a legal case been tested in a US court then he would have all the information.
But it isn't.
It is still following the procedure that he agreed to when taking a license.
He could of contested it if there was nothing to the allegations.
Suddenly the man that conquers everything can't be bothered fighting a case with no basis... yes of course.
Image
User avatar
toolonglegs
 
Posts: 14405
Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2007 7:49 pm
Location: Somewhere with padded walls and really big hills!

Re: HOLY showtime!!! Amstrong accepts life ban!!!

Postby RICHARDH » Tue Sep 04, 2012 11:19 am

We are stuck with technology when what we really want is just stuff that works (Douglas Adams)
User avatar
RICHARDH
 
Posts: 1306
Joined: Tue Sep 16, 2008 2:46 pm
Location: adelaide

Re: HOLY showtime!!! Amstrong accepts life ban!!!

Postby jcjordan » Tue Sep 04, 2012 11:38 pm

RICHARDH wrote:http://www.outsideonline.com/outdoor-adventure/media/books/Keyes-hamilton-the-secret-race.html?page=1

Hamilton's book coming out soon, should make interesting reading.


I wonder if this version of Hamilton's story will be any better than the last 3-4 time he told us the 'truth'.

I don't believe that Lance did not use PED's but I would like to see the facts come out from a more reputable sore.

Hamilton, and Floyd for that manner, are so badly tainted with changing story's and acts of fraud that they could say the sky is blue and my first thought would be that its a lie



Sent from my HTC Sensation Z710a using Tapatalk 2
James
Veni, Vidi, Vespa -- I Came, I Saw, I Rode Home
jcjordan
 
Posts: 1050
Joined: Sat Nov 08, 2008 2:58 pm

Re: HOLY showtime!!! Amstrong accepts life ban!!!

Postby RICHARDH » Wed Sep 05, 2012 11:01 am

I can understand that , but nine other people have agreed with this version of events
We are stuck with technology when what we really want is just stuff that works (Douglas Adams)
User avatar
RICHARDH
 
Posts: 1306
Joined: Tue Sep 16, 2008 2:46 pm
Location: adelaide

Re: HOLY showtime!!! Amstrong accepts life ban!!!

Postby Chris249 » Wed Sep 05, 2012 11:16 am

Xplora wrote:Which in common pub language is "soft/weak/gutless"

Sure, it's all legal stuff, and that's fair enough, but you don't go public with all this stuff if you don't have the ability to actually put your money where your mouth is.....the legal process occurs in the public space, and if you cannot bring all the evidence into the public space with you when you make an accusation against a famous figure (using weasel words like cases pending etc) then you should keep that accusation to yourself. Resolve your cases, then .....not very nice bit removed (be nice).... :mrgreen:


Using pub language about this sort of stuff is a bit like the pub language that says all cyclists are lycra hoons who should be paying rego. It can simply be shorthand for not knowing what is going on, for not having done research, and not giving people the respect one expects for oneself.

People could probably complain about your profession or trade with pub language too, but that may just be because they don't know how it works. I bet I don't know everything about what you do for a living so why should you or I know exactly how USADA should operate and why they work like that?

My degree is in this area, I did a thesis on the laws applying to sporting bodies and I have worked as a regulator and investigator for years and yet it would take me ages to work out whether USADA was really operating correctly, so with respect I can't see how it can be so easy for someone from the outside to waltz into a pub and say "I'm an expert on US administrative law and I know incontrovertibly that USADA are crap." Anyone who could do that would be earning a fortune at the bar.

Running a regulatory body and an investigation is a complex exercise in which many conflicting factors have to be balanced. You have to encourage people to give evidence, but also give people the chance to rebut it. You have to be able to dig deep into lives without destroying them. This is NOT easy and to be honest it gets a bit frustrating when people who have never done it show such contempt for those who do. As in any job, there are problems that people on the outside do not know about and there are reasons why things are done the way they are, although as in any job human factors do come into play and there are mistakes - which is why there are avenues such as arbitration which Lance has decided not to take.

Many legal matters are not fought out in the public space. NDAs etc are very common. Even when an regulator releases a decision or a court comes to a decision they do not release every bit of evidence to the public. I have seen pics of bodies doing things, or bits of bodies, that were used as evidence that you would not want on the front page of your paper, believe me. :cry:

"Case pending" is not a weazel word, it is a statement of the fact that a case is coming up. What is the alternative to ASADA saying things like "case pending"?

Exactly what do you want a body such as ASADA to say when they are preparing a case and the press asks for info, if they do not use such "weazel words"?
Do you want them to say "we refuse to confirm or deny that we are contemplating a case" or something similar? Surely that is more "weazelly" than "case pending". Or do you want them to lie to the public? These things do tend to get a lot more public in America, but that seems to go both ways.

Armstrong's side has made many attacks on witnesses, as any quick Google shows, and therefore USADA's claim that they are protecting witnesses doesn't seem to be unreasonable.
There are many types of racing cyclists. There is the sprinter, the rouleur, the stagiaire, the danser, the descender.... sadly, I'm a mediocre. :-(

2003 Cervelo P2K time trial bike
2010 Merida Cyclocross 4
2008 Giant SS/track
2008 Vivente Como roadie
Chris249
 
Posts: 552
Joined: Sat Aug 08, 2009 12:36 pm

Re: HOLY showtime!!! Amstrong accepts life ban!!!

Postby RonK » Wed Sep 05, 2012 11:43 am

Chris249 wrote:My degree is in this area, I did a thesis on the laws applying to sporting bodies and I have worked as a regulator and investigator for years and yet it would take me ages to work out whether USADA was really operating correctly, so with respect I can't see how it can be so easy for someone from the outside to waltz into a pub and say "I'm an expert on US administrative law and I know incontrovertibly that USADA are crap." Anyone who could do that would be earning a fortune at the bar.

Running a regulatory body and an investigation is a complex exercise in which many conflicting factors have to be balanced. You have to encourage people to give evidence, but also give people the chance to rebut it. You have to be able to dig deep into lives without destroying them. This is NOT easy and to be honest it gets a bit frustrating when people who have never done it show such contempt for those who do. As in any job, there are problems that people on the outside do not know about and there are reasons why things are done the way they are, although as in any job human factors do come into play and there are mistakes - which is why there are avenues such as arbitration which Lance has decided not to take.

Many legal matters are not fought out in the public space. NDAs etc are very common. Even when an regulator releases a decision or a court comes to a decision they do not release every bit of evidence to the public. I have seen pics of bodies doing things, or bits of bodies, that were used as evidence that you would not want on the front page of your paper, believe me. :cry:

"Case pending" is not a weazel word, it is a statement of the fact that a case is coming up. What is the alternative to ASADA saying things like "case pending"?

Exactly what do you want a body such as ASADA to say when they are preparing a case and the press asks for info, if they do not use such "weazel words"?
Do you want them to say "we refuse to confirm or deny that we are contemplating a case" or something similar? Surely that is more "weazelly" than "case pending". Or do you want them to lie to the public? These things do tend to get a lot more public in America, but that seems to go both ways.

Armstrong's side has made many attacks on witnesses, as any quick Google shows, and therefore USADA's claim that they are protecting witnesses doesn't seem to be unreasonable.

A well-reasoned response, not dripping with pub talk or emotional claptrap.

It's astonishing that some seem believe USADA should publish chapter and verse of the testimony and evidence before the case is concluded. But of course what they are hoping for is some names that they sledge and attempt to discredit.

It will be interesting to see how quickly George Hincapie, who is probably the most respected, admired and credible of American professional cyclists after only Armstrong, is turned on and reviled and his credibility once his part in the evidence becomes known.
Cycle touring blog and tour journals: whispering wheels...
User avatar
RonK
 
Posts: 5369
Joined: Mon Aug 24, 2009 2:08 pm
Location: Brisbane, Queensland

PreviousNext

Return to General discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot]



Popular Bike Shops
Torpedo 7 Torpedo7 AU
Ground Effect Ground Effect NZ
Chain Reaction Cycles CRC UK
Wiggle Wiggle UK
Ebay Ebay AU

“Bicycles BNA Twitter
“Bicycles BNA Facebook
“Google+ BNA Google+
“Bicycles BNA Newsletter

> FREE BNA Stickers
> BNA Cycling Kit