'Enough is Enough' - Lance Armstrong

Rofo

No

walshb wrote: »

Why are you despairing?

Where are the positive tests to show he used PEDs?

Did you watch this documentary which was posted earlier in the thread??

walshb

Glass Prison 1214 wrote: »

if you had read this thread then you would have found it posted a few days ago

The thread is into the hundreds and hundreds of posts.

And, am I the only person here not ready to lambast Lance?

btw, I would most likeky vote the third option in the poll. Hand on heart and betting man, I would say he doped.

Jason Todd

Rofo wrote: »

LOL - from The Onion back in 2010:
http://www.theonion.com/articles/lance-armstrong-wants-to-tell-nation-something-but,17973/

Funny stuff!

mcgratheoin

No

any chance of an answer on these?

mcgratheoin wrote: »

Ok, so first question is are you saying that a positive lab test is the only criteria by which anybody should ever be found guilty of doping?

Second question is, do you accept any of the testimony given to the USADA as factual? (kinda moot if your answer is yes to the first question)

Chips Lovell

No

walshb carded for trolling. Please don't post on this thread again.

corny

No

walshb wrote: »

Can you source that please so I can read up.

Its not hard to find. Just type in USADA report.

Undercover Elephant wrote: »

To be fair, that particular one is not very good. "Fully consistent with doping" is not the same as "inexplicable except by doping".

Thats true i suppose but Pellizotti and Astarloa were convicted without failing a test (i think). For “anomalies” i think it was. Lance's blood is certainly anomalous.;)

GlennaMaddy

No

some positives from this debacle

a) discounted Nike Cycling gear to appear in store soon
b) smaller numbers taking out A4 and A3 licences, and a return to 'normal' bunch sizes
c) My personal pro cycling idols are still clean.

Any more?

brandon_flowers

No

WTF? LA steps down from Livestrong, Nike distance themselves from LA but continue to support Livestrong. Money wins again. My head hurts.


http://www.rte.ie/sport/cycling/2012/1017/342065-armstrong-steps-down-as-from-livestrong-charity/

morana

No

GlennaMaddy wrote: »

some positives from this debacle


b) smaller numbers taking out A4 and A3 licences, and a return to 'normal' bunch sizes


Any more?

thats not a positive!

RobFowl

No

GlennaMaddy wrote: »

some positives from this debacle

a) discounted Nike Cycling gear to appear in store soon
b) smaller numbers taking out A4 and A3 licences, and a return to 'normal' bunch sizes
c) My personal pro cycling idols are still clean.

Any more?

A Cool
B excellent
C Don't bet on it.....

NeedMoreGears

Just saw the BBC report re LA stepping down/being dropped by NIKE. Half way down the page was what appeared to be an advert for "EPO Cyclist Supplments". Must click on it at home later to see if someone is taking the p... or if it's for real (well at least as real as the other sites that advertise performance enhancing supplements)

GlennaMaddy

No

NeedMoreGears wrote: »

J... Half way down the page was what appeared to be an advert for "EPO Cyclist Supplments". Must click on it at home later

Don't! it's just another Dick Pound trap

wpd

No

I think Lance may be about to come clean

Thinking about it, its his only play from where he is now

leftism

No

ThisRegard wrote: »

Wow, I don't think Nike would ditch him this quick, I thought they'd at least wait until after the UCI made some sort of statement. the thing is, they've probably made as much money as they can out of him at this stage. There's not a lot to be made from a retired cyclist or if they make much from tri gear.

This is a knee-jerk reaction to the recent accusations that Nike themselves paid large sums of money to Verbruggen at the exact same time that Lance was alleged to have tested positive in 2001.

No smoke without fire...

corny

No

wpd wrote: »

I think Lance may be about to come clean

Thinking about it, its his only play from where he is now

I wouldn't count on it. He can easily play the victim card and say the evil doers at USADA have forced him to give up the fight against cancer. 'Evil cancer loving bastards' is how it'll read.

fat bloke

No

Vladimir Kurtains wrote: »

walshb carded for trolling. Please don't post on this thread again.

Finally! I think I've seen the UCI react quicker than that

Flandria

No

wpd wrote: »

I think Lance may be about to come clean

Thinking about it, its his only play from where he is now

Nah, not until Oprah comes out of retirement and Dubya is on the sofa with him - then the tearful confession. It was all them dirty doping Yewrapeens fault, he only did it to keep up...

noddy69

No

leftism wrote: »

This is a knee-jerk reaction to the recent accusations that Nike themselves paid large sums of money to Verbruggen at the exact same time that Lance was alleged to have tested positive in 2001.

No smoke without fire...

Nike have not denied the payment in the statement given only that they did not pay to cover up a positive test,big difference. Now the statement they were duped atc, its gonna get more interesting as the weeks go by, he is sinking faster and faster

steve9859

walshb wrote: »

Is that your answer?

Whare are Marion Jones' positive tests. Or David Millar's. Or ANYONE else's. You are aware that tests aren't the only evidence of drug taking, right?

Edit: sorry, didn't see the ban. Wouldn't have taken the bait otherwise.....

petethedrummer

No

corny wrote: »

Didn't they all do that? Were Ullrich, Hamilton, Mr. 60% not trying to maximise the cheating for their own benefit????

Armstrong obviously thought Ferrari was the best and obtained an exclusive deal. The other guys had a chance in '97 and '98 to do the same and they didn't take it. Armstrong went one step further than his rivals.

In '99 it is pretty well accepted that most of the other riders stopped or more likely curtailed their doping. Armstrong didn't. Walsh recalls the press room laughing at the ridiculous performances in the '99 tour. Again Armstrong went one step further than his rivals.

corny wrote: »

The only difference between them, on the drugs issue, was that Ferrari didn't **** up and give Armstrong someone elses blood like Fuentes.

Armstrong failed at least one test and had another alleged fail (Though i will accept that the fail may be attributable to anyone in the chain from Ferrari to Armstrong). Ullrich never failed any under Fuentes! Fuentes also had many clients. Ferrari had 1 team in cycling. Much easier to manage and not mess up blood bags.

corny wrote: »

In the early nineties what Ferrari did with Gewiss proves he was the man. 1,2,3 in Fleche Wallone, winnner of the Giro, second in the tour, winner of Lombardia. They set the TTT record average speed at the tour only to be broken by... you guessed it Lance and Discovery 10 years later. What he said about EPO being like orange juice nailed his colours to the mast. He was going to bend the rules to their fullest on his journey with or without Armstrong which was my point before you accused me of being duplicitous.

Cechinni had a tour winner from a proper donkey in Riis, I don't know who Ullrich worked with in 97, don't think it was Ferrari. Conconi had a 5 time tour winner client. Did Ferrari have a TDF winner until Armstrong (Granted he probably had a Giro winner or 2)? Has he had one since? Was Contador seeing him while at Astana? Was Contador even allowed to see him while Armstrong was on the team? They wouldn't let him share the team car so I'd say he got his own supplies and still hammered Armstrong.

corny wrote: »

Its de rigeur to think of Armstrong at the head of affairs leading (Stalinesque) the peloton down the slippery slope but the reality is he was just playing the game with scores of people who thought the same way about drugs in cycling. That was my original point btw, disagree if you must.

I don't think anyone is suggesting that the state of cycling is due to one man alone. Cycling was already morally bankrupt but the conspiracy surrounding Armstrong really really stinks. It's the payments to the UCI and the alleged ratting on rivals that really is the pits. So I don't think it matters which doctor he employed, he had all the other aces up his sleeve. The other major cycling scandals have been bad but this truly is the worst and at the head of it is Armstrong.

Anyways, I don't think we'll won't agree. I'll have to bow out from any more long posts for now. Someone in work just said: "so you're the guy who argues on the internet."

Plastik

No

Velonation are reporting that Radioshack have now also hit the road and terminated all contracts with Armstrong.

Mergal

No

When this broke last week they interviewed a guy from Team sky not sure who it was, could have been Froome, and he defended Armstrong, claiming anybody who came back from cancer to win 7 TDFs is incredible. Also when Wiggins was being interviewed by the BBC prior to racing in the Olympics he mentioned Armstrong when asked about his future,he said something along the lines of 'well i'm not gonna try do what Lance did and go for 7.' You would have to think that someone like Wiggins would have been well aware of Armstrong's shenanigans, so why make reference to him. Probably nothing, but I found it slightly curious.

Lusk Doyle

No

Mergal wrote: »

When this broke last week they interviewed a guy from Team sky not sure who it was, could have been Froome, and he defended Armstrong, claiming anybody who came back from cancer to win 7 TDFs is incredible. Also when Wiggins was being interviewed by the BBC prior to racing in the Olympics he mentioned Armstrong when asked about his future,he said something along the lines of 'well i'm not gonna try do what Lance did and go for 7.' You would have to think that someone like Wiggins would have been well aware of Armstrong's shenanigans, so why make reference to him. Probably nothing, but I found it slightly curious.

Not froome, Alex dowsett. The big back pedalling plonker that he is!

GT_TDI_150

No

walshb wrote: »

Armstrong says he didn't dope. And, yes, he would say that, but where are the test results to say he doped? I am aware of the 1999 test.

And i assume that you are aware some of his b samples have tested positive for synthetic epo when a french lab ran anonamous tour samples from years gone by through their system?

Only once a french journo got the results an cross refd them with the test codes of the riders from the tour(obtained from uci) did it transpire lances samples were positive.

RobFowl

No

wpd wrote: »

I think Lance may be about to come clean

Even if he did there are still fanboys out there who would believe him "innocent".....

corny

No

petethedrummer wrote: »

In '99 it is pretty well accepted that most of the other riders stopped or more likely curtailed their doping.

The rest i can leave (to stop you getting hassle) but on this.

Organised doping by the teams- certainly. They were in a panic not to be raided but on an individual level- not a chance. Some may have backed off a little but they'd be a minority imo.

Hermy

No

According to cyclingnews.com André Greipel has come out in support of USADA.

From the same website Anheuser-Busch have also confirmed that they will not renew their contract with Armstrong.

The Armstrong train is falling apart.

Lusk Doyle

No

How come the poll adds up to 101%???

Cienciano

No

Radioshack have cut ties with him too.

Beasty wrote: »

Hang on, hang on - I know this one ...

... Colonel Mustard in the Library with the Kitchen knife??

It was actually Colonel Mustard, in the camper van, with the syringe :pac:

Cienciano

No

Lusk Doyle wrote: »

How come the poll adds up to 101%???

Because that was Lances hematocrit level before his comeback