Here we go again. LA in faces fresh charges **Mod warning - see post #1**

Beasty

RobFowl wrote: »

Off topic but why is it called sherlocking ??????

Sean Sherlock is the minister responsible for the legislation that resulted in the current Boards rules on quoting from copyrighted material

Ryan is completely innocent (on this one anyway)

Chips Lovell

RobFowl wrote: »

Off topic but why is it called sherlocking ??????

Sean Sherlock, who introduced more stringent copyright regulations.

Jawgap

....except when it involves Strava, in which case segments and KoMs can be "sherlocked" where by someone called Ryan rides one of your segments / KoMs and sets an impossible-to-achieve time (locking the segment in) that immediately has you plotting to take the car and your bike GPS for a spin some evening:)

ednwireland

Michelle Ferrari, Pepe Marti and Luis Garcia del Moral receive lifetime bans

Read more: http://www.velonation.com/News/ID/12354/Michelle-Ferrari-Pepe-Marti-and-Luis-Garcia-del-Moral-receive-lifetime-bans.aspx#ixzz20F6iM19f

Trio didn't contest serious doping charges made by USADA

Making a ruling based on the non-contestation of the charges facing them, the US Anti-Doping Agency has applied a lifetime ban on the controversial doctor Michelle Ferrari, blocking him from ‘participating in any activity or competition organized by any signatory to the [WADA] Code or any member of any signatory.’

Also facing the same sanction is former US Postal Service doctor Luis Garcia del Moral and team trainer Pepe Marti, who also coached Alberto Contador for some time while he was with the Discovery Channel and Astana team.

Read more: http://www.velonation.com/News/ID/12354/Michelle-Ferrari-Pepe-Marti-and-Luis-Garcia-del-Moral-receive-lifetime-bans.aspx#ixzz20F72AFYv

RobFowl

Lances attorney (or one of them ) seems to suggest he'll be found guilty by the USADA. Not an admission of guilt but a condemnation of the process though.

"Because Armstrong's attorney said in the lawsuit that Armstrong is "certain to lose" if he tries to fight the USADA charges by proceeding to an arbitration hearing.
Not surprisingly, this startling admission was not supported by the concession that Armstrong would lose because the evidence that the USADA has amassed against him is irrefutable.
Rather, it was explained by dozens of pages impugning the USADA, the head of the USADA, the US government, and other parties to the USADA's doping allegations, and then by making a series of allegations designed to show that it is almost impossible for any athlete, including Armstrong, to prevail over the USADA in an arbitration hearing"

Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/lance-armstrongs-lawyer-says-he-is-certain-to-lose-his-doping-case-2012-7#ixzz20FSw0Fjn

calerbass

Wonder what Sean Yates and Phil Sherwen are thinking or know? were'nt they involved with Motorola(Sherwen)Discovery(Yates) back in the day.

I'm looking forward to Emily Reilly's (Armstrong's Personal masseuse for a few years) book ban being lifted and reading it if the inevitable happens.

CheGuedara

Looks like it didn't take Lance long to shorten the injunction motion substantially so it could be resubmitted. Will be interesting to see where/if this thing goes.

Here's a copy of the new motion floating around the web...

RobFowl

CheGuedara wrote: »

Here's a copy of the new motion floating around the web...

Cruel ........;)

Lumen

FFS.

McQuaid comments on USADA lifetime bans
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/mcquaid-comments-on-usada-lifetime-bans

hardCopy

Lumen wrote: »

FFS.

McQuaid comments on USADA lifetime bans
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/mcquaid-comments-on-usada-lifetime-bans

Is it a requirement that one must be an inept, incompetent clod to administer a sports governing body?

dermur

hardCopy wrote: »

Is it a requirement that one must be an inept, incompetent clod to administer a sports governing body?

If only McQuaid was inept & incompetent...

buffalo

I like their diagram: http://www.cyclismas.com/2012/07/the-legend-of-the-500/

dermur

buffalo wrote: »

I like their diagram: http://www.cyclismas.com/2012/07/the-legend-of-the-500/[/QUOTE]


Now now - let's not doubt the man, he may be including high-school tests, driving tests, spelling tests, IQ tests....

Flandria

Well LA's people have got their wish by finally dragging Congress in. A Wisconsin Republican is concerned about the $9m 'taxpayers money' that USADA receives. http://velonews.competitor.com/2012/07/news/u-s-lawmaker-requests-probe-of-usada-over-armstrong-case_229472

This might prove key to Armstrong's er, 'defence' - he always wanted Capitol Hill onside...

tunney

Flandria wrote: »

Well LA's people have got their wish by finally dragging Congress in. A Wisconsin Republican is concerned about the $9m 'taxpayers money' that USADA receives. http://velonews.competitor.com/2012/07/news/u-s-lawmaker-requests-probe-of-usada-over-armstrong-case_229472

This might prove key to Armstrong's er, 'defence' - he always wanted Capitol Hill onside...

Mey bit being:

"Sensenbrenner represents the Fifth Congressional District of Wisconsin. The Fifth District includes parts of Jefferson, Milwaukee, and Waukesha counties, and all of Ozaukee and Washington counties. Armstrong’s longtime bicycle sponsor, Trek, is based in Waterloo, Wisconsin, which is part of Jefferson County."

manafana

of course armstrong has this congressmen onside otherwise it would never be mentioned, armstrong is extremely influential and well connected.

petethedrummer

John McCain sticks his oar in.

http://www.mccain.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=PressOffice.PressReleases&ContentRecord_id=81e65d04-d3a5-57a6-a985-0c2ebfaa3cb0

mcgratheoin

petethedrummer wrote: »

John McCain sticks his oar in.

http://www.mccain.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=PressOffice.PressReleases&ContentRecord_id=81e65d04-d3a5-57a6-a985-0c2ebfaa3cb0

I bet whoever tried to lobby him from Lance's team is sorry they said anything now....

pc11

Wow, Lance is really getting desperate now with the pathetic court petition. The politicians getting involved is a new low, it's like a 3rd world country's political interference in an investigation. I think he had to respond by today. David Walsh in last week's Sunday Times speculated that he might not respond at all, and just accept the inevitable.

Fair play to McCain for that statement!

AstraMonti

What would he do now if he doesn't respond? Come clean or go hide in a cave? His ego won't take it. I suspect we will see soon enough a statement in the likes of "They have been chasing me for too long, I am tired, I quit, you can say whatever you like about me" and retire like a "hero" in it's own mind and these people mind..

kumate_champ07

Lance wouldnt last 1 day here on boards.ie with the 'attack the post not the poster' rule

hardCopy

kumate_champ07 wrote: »

Lance wouldnt last 1 day here on boards.ie with the 'attack the post not the poster' rule

I think Floyd wins that award for his phone calls Lemond!

joker77

USADA countering the recent claims:

http://nyvelocity.com/files/u18/Exhibit1%28Chart%29.pdf

Harrybelafonte

joker77 wrote: »

USADA countering the recent claims:

http://nyvelocity.com/files/u18/Exhibit1%28Chart%29.pdf

That's an awesome piece of work, wonder if they've published similar rebukes before. Might help keep the LA fans quiet.

kumate_champ07

quiet again

joker77

http://www.150wattsofawesome.blogspot.ie/2012/07/i-love-good-response.html

It would appear that Mr. Armstrong is cool with the USADA having exclusive jurisdiction over him when it results in the receipt of a $5 million payout, but not cool with this jurisdiction when it could potentially jeopardize his multiple Tour de France victories. I know how Captain Obvious that sounds, but seriously, this is not how rules are applied. The fancy people do not get to choose when the rules apply to them. So which one is it, Mr. Armstrong? Does the USADA have exclusive jurisdiction to decide anti-doping violations or not?

<snip>

Flandria

McQ remains stoically loyal to the UCI vow of silence on Armstrong but guess what? - the bio passport is the best thing ever!:roll eyes:

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/mcquaid-disavows-uci-responsibility-in-armstrong-case

Undercover Elephant

The Exhibit contains this gem:

The vast majority of tests conducted on Mr Armstrong are unlikely to have been tested for EPO or anabolic steriods. Most of the tests on Mr Armstrong are blood tests which are not typically direct tests for the presence of prohibited substances. Moreover, EPO testing of urine samples requires more expensive special testing that is not performed on a majority of urine samples collected.

In other words, we don't actually do a lot of testing for banned substances. We prefer to look at circumstantial evidence, 'cos it's cheaper.

Quite apart from the Armstrong circus, this isn't exactly confidence-inspiring, is it?

furiousox

UCI attempts to block USADA case against Armstrong :eek:

http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/news/latest/534271/uci-attempts-to-block-usada-armstrong-case.html

Russman

"fox guarding the henhouse" love it !!

RobFowl

I find it hard to see how USADA had juristriction over Ferrari and he neither lived in the US, worked there nor was officially contracted to any US team.

That said would love to see the likes of his banished from all sports for good. Personally hold him far more culpable and more of a "cancer" in the sport than LA.

RobFowl

Undercover Elephant wrote: »

The Exhibit contains this gem:


In other words, we don't actually do a lot of testing for banned substances. We prefer to look at circumstantial evidence, 'cos it's cheaper.

Quite apart from the Armstrong circus, this isn't exactly confidence-inspiring, is it?

The cost of testing for EPO is really expensive and if all samples were tested then there would be probably 1/2 the number of tests done. They are all stored now so if a cheaper test becomes available things could change.
The testing window for picking up EPO used is so short the cost/benefit ratio is debatable. Targeted testing using the bio passport is IMO the best way forward.

dermur

RobFowl wrote: »

The testing window for picking up EPO used is so short the cost/benefit ratio is debatable. Targeted testing using the bio passport is IMO the best way forward.

Agreed - as long as it's not the UCI that's doing it.

I don't see how there can ever be a "truth and reconciliation" in cycling as long as the UCI are around.

RobFowl

dermur wrote: »

Agreed - as long as it's not the UCI that's doing it.

I don't see how there can ever be a "truth and reconciliation" in cycling as long as the UCI are around.

I tend to agree the UCI needs at least a complete purge of the old guard. Hurts to say it but Pat McQuaid has too much assosciation with the Verbruggan era and is part of the problem now.

I think a truth and reconcilliation forum at some stage is needed. I'd like to see the LA case finished before that though..... (if that happens in my lifetime :rolleyes:)

RobFowl

Wada tells the UCI to back off.......

http://www.velonation.com/News/ID/12586/WADA-backs-USADAs-jurisdiction-in-ArmstrongUSPS-doping-investigation.aspx

AstraMonti

Undercover Elephant

When you have the International Tennis Federation wading into a cycling dispute between warring authorities, I think we can say with some confidence that it is a shambles.

buffalo

Undercover Elephant wrote: »

When you have the International Tennis Federation wading into a cycling dispute between warring authorities, I think we can say with some confidence that it is a shambles.

I think you're reading into that a bit much - they're not wading into anything. They did set a good example that maybe the UCI should follow - respecting USADA's sanction (and therefore jurisdiction via WADA) in Spain.

Undercover Elephant

buffalo wrote: »

I think you're reading into that a bit much - they're not wading into anything. They did set a good example that maybe the UCI should follow - respecting USADA's sanction (and therefore jurisdiction via WADA) in Spain.

It's one of those irregular verbs, innit? I respect another authority's sanction, you wade in, he naively gets involved in a media circus.

CramCycle

RobFowl wrote: »

The cost of testing for EPO is really expensive and if all samples were tested then there would be probably 1/2 the number of tests done. They are all stored now so if a cheaper test becomes available things could change.
The testing window for picking up EPO used is so short the cost/benefit ratio is debatable. Targeted testing using the bio passport is IMO the best way forward.

I think it was suggested before but have the pro teams pay for their own tests through a dedicated but impartial body.
The more tests that are getting done, simple economics will dictate that the cost per sample will come down. Lets say WADA are doing it, UCI permitting, they figure out if they blanket test all pro teams at all events, they would have a rough estimation of the number of tests, add on to this the number of randomised tests that they would like to do at slightly lower levels.
Tender for a price, give the number of tests (minimum) and ask for the price per test. The ones used for non pro riders would have the cost of their tests covered by an admin fee that the pro teams pay (such as a percentage increase per test past on to the pro teams).
Refusal to pay, means your not allowed partake in sanctioned events, end of.
You can't say they can't afford it?

TheBlaaMan

Jonathan Vaughters of Garmin-Sharp has been long understood to have doped during his career in the late 90's, but he never openly admitted it. All that changed in the past few weeks on Twitter - for a great analysis of which see here - http://www.cyclismas.com/2012/08/vaughters-non-admission-admission/.

He then confirmed it in an editorial piece in the New York Times this morning , here : http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/12/opinion/sunday/how-to-get-doping-out-of-sports.html?_r=2&ref=opinion&pagewanted=all

Another nail in the Armstrong coffin?

morana

reading Stokes stuff I think a guilty verdict will have huge implications not only for the athlete but others in the sport as well.

Maybe we should just blank the tour results for the last 20 years.

RobFowl

morana wrote: »

reading Stokes stuff I think a guilty verdict will have huge implications not only for the athlete but others in the sport as well.

Maybe we should just blank the tour results for the last 20 years.

Will not look good for the sport but it needs to be done. An attempt to purge the engrained doping once and for all.

dermur

morana wrote: »

Maybe we should just blank the tour results for the last 20 years.

Sounds a bit like sweeping it under the carpet - that's gone on long enough as it is and look where it's got pro-cycling.

But you're right in terms of placing any value on results and records.

Fastest Ascent of Alpe d'Huez: Pantini, Armstrong, Ullrich, Landis.

I'm sure there must be plenty equally if not more meaningless records in cycling.

Flandria

Release date for Tyler's book? Lance's birthday of course...:D:D

Haldir

Flandria wrote: »

Release date for Tyler's book? Lance's birthday of course...:D:D

That's Daniel Coyle off Armstrong's Christmas list so. He wrote "Lance Armstrong's War" a few years ago with LA's co-operation and a very good read it was too. I particularly liked the chapter on Floyd. Lot of water (and EPO) under the bridge since then!

kumate_champ07

what's the story with Lances Irish ex masseur, she wrote a book that spilled the beans but he blocked it from being released?

Flandria

kumate_champ07 wrote: »

what's the story with Lances Irish ex masseur, she wrote a book that spilled the beans but he blocked it from being released?

Emma O'Reilly? I'm not sure she wrote a book but she did spill the beans to David Walsh in LA Confidentiel which is blocked for sale outside of France...

Her side of the story is here
http://bicycling.com/blogs/theselection/2011/04/27/emma-o’reilly-responds-to-strickland’s-“endgame”/

furiousox

A lot of the material in LA Confidentiel was used in Walsh's book 'From Lance to Landis' which is a fascinating read.
Might be worth a second read now after the Landis confession and all that's going on with Armstrong.

AstraMonti

How McQuaid’s stance on the USADA-Armstrong case is hurting the UCI.


http://bicycling.com/blogs/boulderreport/2012/08/13/the-last-king/