open topic, for anything cycling related.
The Washington Post reported on a copy of a 15-page letter sent to Lance Armstrong by USADA on Tuesday. In it, the agency alleged that some of Armstrong's blood samples from 2009 and 2010 were "fully consistent with blood manipulation including EPO use and/or blood transfusions.
Imagine if those 7 titles were stripped from him. Those are some very specific and firm allegations.
The only good Cyclist is a Bicyclist
Huge fan of booted RGers who just can't help themselves
Correct me if I am wrong: Lance never failed a drug test - do we know if he missed any drug tests?
Charges leveled based on hearsay and not test results are pretty weak and refelct poorly on those leveling the charges.
Awesome lose lose situation!
Charges are based on testimony of ex pros and lab technicians. They also go on to state that Lance's bio passport for 09/10 indicates EPO usage and blood transfusion.
After all this time I am done caring what the outcome is but I don't think this should be fobbed off as a vendetta against 'Lance'
“Get a bicycle. You will not regret it. If you live.” Mark Twain
That will depend what “fully consistent with blood manipulation including EPO use and/or blood transfusions” turns out to be actually meaning. But it's not a strong statement.
USADA say they have witnesses, not hearsay (ie, the witness saw the activity, not that the witnesses were told about the activity). If those witnesses hold up then USADA don't need test results. Again, we'll see.
USADA's arguments about their exceeding of their statute of limitations seems weak, and if Armstrong's lawyers win on that point we may never get to the substance of the allegations.
The Queen has just appeared on tele declaring the can of worms open.
This is going to be a real legal test for the ICU/WADA/whoever gets on board. Backdating tests nearly 10 years?
MY RIDES: My Velospace Profile
A vendetta that has cost and is still costing a huge amount of money, and to what end?
The destruction of a hero’s reputation, and in the process the destruction of an organisation that has done a huge amount of good for cancer sufferers.
...........and if anyone believes that the pro circuit is now squeaky clean has their head up their backside.
I don't quite get the Lance hero worship thing (not directed at above statements, just my personal view). I found the article about Live Strong and their actual monetary funding eye-opening. Ask the layman if live Strong fund cancer research and I'm sure they'll say 'yes'. They've raised awareness through the roof, however, and that can only be positive. This wont stop Live Strong, I very much doubt that.
To me, when every guy he beat says "I was doping" and his ex-teammates came out and said "we saw him do it, we all did it", I'm going to arrive at my own conclusion, as flawed as it may be. I do believe there's an element of his physical prowess that is a level above, and maybe his level of assistance wasnt as great as the others. I'm not going to argue with the die-hard Lance fans on this, we believe what we believe. A comment on a facebook post regarding George Hincapie's retirement was littered with posts from people saying "he testified against Lance, therefore I hate George". Nobody needs that kind of fan.
However, I do think it has now turned into a witch hunt. Interesting to see that he's winning high-level triathlons, presumably being tested, and nothing is showing up.
MY RIDES: My Velospace Profile
Cycling may not be the cleanest sport, but it's a hell of alot cleaner in 2012 than in 2002 for example. If it wasn't for the ever increasing pressure on the sport to detox the TDF would be a 2 day event by now.
The only good Cyclist is a Bicyclist
Huge fan of booted RGers who just can't help themselves
Lance is a hero? Hmm. Just for balance I will say he is a crook.
Funny, just last week he was saying he wouldn't be fighting any more doping charges, now he has come out swinging.
As for the LanceStrong foundation. They may have done plenty of good, but by christ they have lined some pockets in the process.
It is funny, there are people on Twitter and other forums that have been extremely vocal about getting Contador (and other names that don't need to be repeated) and yet now they are saying Lance is a champion who should be left alone!
I hope to Fred they prove nothing, not for LAs sake but because of the damage that will be done to the sport and the whole guilt by association thing that will have peoples looking at ALL riders in a bad light.
...whatever the road rules, self-preservation is the absolute priority for a cyclist when mixing it with motorised traffic.
London Boy 29/12/2011
What disturbs me here is that "vendetta" is precisely what this is. Based on what evidence, you ask.
Once they have taken a view that they think you did it (whatever "it" is) it becomes all about how to "get" you.
This is exactly how the NSW police talk, it is how they think, it is how they work. Having been a witness and victim in a criminal case, and having a senior detective for a neighbour, I have some familiarity.
It's like they have a frame bolted to the front of their heads, through which they view the world. It has crosshairs on it. Once you fit inside the frame, their aim to get you in the crosshairs. I would suggest that all investigative and prosecutorial agencies work more-or-less the same way, worldwide.
In view of this momentum that these agencies get, I'm glad we have a presumption of innocence and a beyond reasonable doubt onus of proof for guilt here in Australia for criminal cases.
The problem with the WADA and USADA is that the onus shifts to the accused. Reading through the Contador decision, there was a view that he probably didn't administer any Clenbuterol to himself, that it came via contaminated supplements.
However, because he didn't *prove* that, he got a 2-year ban. So most people think he doped. The fine factual distinction is lost.
So I can understand Lance getting angry. Look at this weeks headlines: after how many years, have the Chamberlains finally been conclusively declared innocent and the shadow on their reputations removed? And at what cost? And that was with an onus of proof supposedly beyond reasonable doubt.
On the other hand, if he is guilty, then while his fundraising efforts and legacy will suffer perhaps fatally it will have overwhelmingly been self-inflicted.
It all depends on what the real truth is. Will we find that out? I doubt it.
If there is substance to these allegations, then lets let it go through. But until then, it just gets tiring listening to this same old thing over-and-over again. It has the appearance of a vendetta, because it has been over-and-over again, the Floyd Landis accusations, etc.
What this does of course do is make everyone guilty by association, even those who are clean. And for the rest of us, we won't just by lycra clad loonies who drive motorists mad, we'll now be doped-up lycra-clad-loonies too. It hurts the reputation of the sport as a whole.
Giant TCR SL1 / Cervelo P5 Six / Specialized Langster Pro
You need backtesting because often it takes the doctors who are a screening for doping about 10 years to catch up with the doctors who are doing the doping. If you look at the history of gold medal winners in the US athletics teams, there seems to be a definite pattern.
I am unable to reconcile the testimony saying he doped himself and he doped others whilst not returning a positive test or ebing caught out.
There has been so much mud flung up in the air, a lot will stick regardless of the outcome.
I'm no fan boy of LA, I fell into the cycling addiction after he retired.
It would of been nice to think of him as a cycling prodigy - alas that is not to be, too much doubt in the equation now.
I've always thought for years that they are all on the juice and therefore the playing field is still fairly level.
Just on stripping titles - Contador didn't loose ALL of his Tour de France wins after his verdict.
Can't say I can voice an opinion on this because I don't really know the answer - I have heard extremely valid arguments from both sides over many years and as we know in the world of doping, even so called 'conclusive' evidence can be challenged and doubt raise - both sides throwing arguments and counter arguments in a messy fight - so best if I stay out of it.
So onto the TDF titles - if it went as far as a conviction (because it is 'opening formal action' at this stage) can they really take all the titles away?
What about John Bruyneel who is also accused, what happens to him?
Useful reading, the (PDF) letter with the actual charges against Lance Armstrong.
Hope it doesn't impact on LiveStrong too much, regardless of the personality it has been built upon, it is still a valid cause and no doubt has propelled other cycling related charity causes worldwide.
Well that's certainly the line put out by Armstrong's people this morning, but "you say vendetta, I say long-running complex investigation". USADA aren't above spin either, using Armstrong's lack of meeting with USADA to blacken his name, whereas the likelihood is that his lawyers were simply being conservative, as lawyers are wont to be.
I find the most worrying aspect of this the statute of limitations. It should be possible to test someone's blood in twenty years time and say "hey, they cheated".
It does matter to me that the peleton aren't doped to the eyeballs, simply because that does affect the atitude of drivers towards me. It's also important that the peleton doesn't dope because that means that amateurs don't dope. And there are enough drugged up people who choose a remote corner of my workplace to die in without adding cyclists to that collection.
I am increasingly beyond caring. I don't ride my bike because I saw Mr Armstrong race. Even where I do care, is all this fuss proportionate to a bike rider cheating in a race?
After all of these years, I still find it disappointing to hear stuff like this:
Call me naive or stupid or too honest, but I wouldn't be able to sleep at night if I were to win any sort of event by doping.
How can drug cheats look their kids in the eye with a straight face? What sort of lesson is this for them? What sort of message does this send to the up-and-comers?
The arguments about a vendetta seem to completely miss the point. Where there is smoke, there is fire. You can argue about legalities and civil liberties all you want. A cheat is a cheat and they need to be exposed as such. The fact that the science takes years/decades to catch up shouldn't matter. Nor should the person's social standing.
Really? Do you still believe Lindy Chamberlain murdered her own daughter in a satanic ritual?
Dunno what that has to do with the price of fish, but since you asked: Regardless of the legal outcome, we'll never know the whole truth. There are reasons that this whole thing has dragged on for 32 years.
what gets me is that they are accusing LA of systematic doping over a number of years as well as being a supplier of drugs over a number of years yet he is the only rider charged.
IF you rely on the testimony of Floyd Landers, who is an admitted cheat and liar for this I ask, if he was being guided and supplied by Lance how did he get caught and Lance not. Is he suggesting that Lance was using better gear than himself.
I cant help but think people want LA as a notch on the belt and see his conviction as the biggest fish in the pond.
I hope he is clean, at this stage I choose to believe he is clean but how many tests must a person submit to before he is left alone. Is it now he is starting to excel in another endurance sport they wish to attack. Surely if he has been doping for over a decade or so wouldn't their be physical signs, I mean it killed Flo-Jo
as someone else posted, its a lose lose situation
2011 Felt F75
2012 Fuji Nevada 2.0
after having read a lot of evidence on both Contador and Lance, i'm convinced they both doped.
however, i have a lot more sympathy for Lance than Dertie. the simple reason is, Lance beat other dopers while he himself was doped. he broke the rules, but he wasn't "cheating" - in my book at least.
OTOH, Dertie is a cheat. he has sought to beat riders who there is far more reason to believe are clean, by taking drugs. that is a far more heinous crime.
Who is online