Tour de France

[Furball]

In terms of balance of probabilities I reckon he's guilty. However, that's not evidence.

 

[social]

Are you arguing that their penalties are too light or Armstrongs is too hard?

Both

 

[benchmark00]

Both

Well without going into each individual case because I only really am up to speed on the Lewis issue, he was found to have a very small amount of steroids in his body, so little that it was passed that it was not performance enhancing.

I'm not sure what else you want to happen here? They obviously have a case against Armstrong, where evidence that has not been released will be released during the course of the 'trial' but Armstrong is refusing to contest the allegations.

I'm all for innocent until proven guilty, but what would happen if a suspected murderer just says 'nah ****, don't want to respond to the allegations'. We let him off too?

 

[social]

Well without going into each individual case because I only really am up to speed on the Lewis issue, he was found to have a very small amount of steroids in his body, so little that it was passed that it was not performance enhancing.

I'm not sure what else you want to happen here? They obviously have a case against Armstrong, where evidence that has not been released will be released during the course of the 'trial' but Armstrong is refusing to contest the allegations.

I'm all for innocent until proven guilty, but what would happen if a suspected murderer just says 'nah ****, don't want to respond to the allegations'. We let him off too?

He's been "tried" several hundred times in the form of testing and passed every one and a 2 year federal investigation came up with nothing

The USADA have questions about 2 samples taken in 2009/2010 (i.e. well after he won the last of his TDFs) and bought testimony from some questionable sources.

Based on that "evidence", they claim that he has been doping since the age of 15!

What's more, at the arbitration hearing that he was supposed to attend he wasnt going to be allowed to question witnesses or the accuracy of their conclusions re the questionable samples

Seriously, if that is not being rail-roaded then I dont know what is and I'm not surprised that he has told them to get ****ed

As for Lewis, he tested positive 3 times for banned stimulants and was let off on a warning on each occasion by US authorities so as to allow him to compete at the Olympics

If the same results had been recorded at the Olympics, he would have been banned and his career finished

 

[uvelocity]

I'm all for innocent until proven guilty, but what would happen if a suspected murderer just says 'nah ****, don't want to respond to the allegations'. We let him off too?

do they have double jeopardy on ubunt00

 

[Redbacks]

Stripping him of the 1999-2005 titles, however, is not the solution. It's been commented on already, but what do you do with them? Leave a blank in the history books? Award them to Ullrich/Zulle/Beloki, all of whom have been implicated in/convicted of/admitted to doping?

The public perception will then be the titles will just go to the fastest cheat who hasn't been caught.

It's seems the tour is too grueling for cyclists making them use drugs/doping to perform for the lenght of the event. The governing body should consider more rest days or shorten it I think.

 

[Spikey]

check out greg baum stealing my work: Fallen star quits the ride of his life

cycingnews has put up a neato index if you want to be overwhelmed by links: Index Of Lance Armstrong Doping Allegations Over The Years | Cyclingnews.com

under L'Equipe allegations:

French anti-doping authorities had retroactively applied the new EPO test to samples from the 1999 Tour de France in order to test the robustness of their new test. The samples, which had been taken before the EPO test had been developed, allegedly showed evidence of EPO use but the lab personnel had no knowledge of the identities of riders behind positive samples.

A journalist from L'Equipe managed to acquire documentation from the UCI with sample numbers and match positives to those of Armstrong. However, the UCI's independent analyst ruled the data was unreliable and could not be used for doping punishment because the samples were tested strictly for research purposes. The World Anti-Doping Agency objected, sparking a long, heated battle between WADA president Dick Pound and then-UCI president Hein Verbruggen.

oh yeah and around 2002 armstrong gave the UCI 25K to help fight doping btw

 

[social]

The trouble with the above is that none of these allegations have ever been proven and still havent been as no-one, other than the USADA knows what the new evidence is.

The recent hearing in the US are proof of this as the judge in that case agreed with Armstrong's argument that he was not provided with an adequate charging document by concluding that "The Court noted during the August 10 hearing, this "charging document" is so vague and unhelpful it would not pass muster in any court in the United States" and no further evidence was presented at the hearing.

In spite of the above, the US anti-doping official who has led the investigation, had the gall to say that he had expected Armstrong to withdraw. “It was our expectation from the beginning. He knows all the evidence as well and he knows the truth, and so the smarter move on his part is to attempt to hide behind baseless accusations of process.:

How the **** can he have known what the evidence was if they have never released it?

No wonder the Judge also felt compelled to say that "it is difficult to avoid the conclusion that USADA is motivated more by politics and a desire for media attention than faithful adherence to its obligations to USOC."

Anyway, like most I suspect that Armstrong probably did do something illegal but until such time as it is proven then .......

 

[Spikey]

here's a nice big read about armstrong (allegedly) using epo in 99 and some other stuff: Michael Ashenden | NY Velocity - New York bike racing culture, news and events

 

[vic_orthdox]

Hamilton's book just about to come out, a "game ender".

 

[Neil Pickup]

Looking forward to that one.

Looks like the Vuelta might be a cracking finish, too. A ride too far for Froome, though.

 

[social]

Mark Cavendish breaks long silence to confirm he wants a move away from Team Sky - Telegraph

Unless every race was held on a dead flat course, why would anyone build a team around a sprinter?

 

[Spikey]

does a bunch of team-mates saying they took drugs count as a thing

bump

 

[BoyBrumby]

Interesting the US doping bods have released at least part of their evidence now. As one understands some proceedings against other US Postal personages are still ongoing.

On the 2 + 2 = 5 bike (ha) also noted one of the riders who gave evidence against Armstrong was a Sky rider (Michael Barry); in light of their absolute dominance of this year's race...?

Sky have said they have no doubts he was clean duirng his stint with them but, to paraphrase Mandy Rice-Davies, they would say that, wouldn't they?

 

[Spikey]

well, Sky murdered the tour in a fashion not seen since Armstrong, so it basically means a healthy amount of people will have their doubts. But I don't think a Sky rider being one of the guys who gave evidence changes anything.

 

[BoyBrumby]

USADA now suggesting Armstrong perjured himself in court back in 2005, the BBC reports.

The article mentions Marion Jones (another athlete who famously "never failed a drug test") doing stir for a similar offence.

Be very interesting to see how this plays out now. My personal guess is that it's partly a gambit from USADA in the long game of getting Armstrong to finally cough. A confession might be part of a plea bargain to avoid a similar fate to Jones.

 

[Spikey]

please get him into a court and someone please film it.

 

[straw man]

Top article on this

Cookies must be enabled. | The Australian

 

[uvelocity]

its a **** article. can only read a pararaph

 

[straw man]

Opening paragraph goes for shock value with a few harsh words used (though hard to call any of those unfair), while the second sentence is unnecessary. However the rest of the article is an excellent dismissal of the cult surrounding Armstrong.