Lance Armstrong being stripped of all titles.

Hanley

Clearlier wrote: »

Which bit? There are already quite a few books out there about doping in cycling. Tyler Hamilton has one which directly relates to this.

So does David Millar, an excellent book. I mean this specific case.

Scuba Ste wrote: »

'How I saved sport from itself by Lance Armstrong'.

Something like that alright

onlyup

Scuba Ste wrote: »

I thought I'd drag this back up from the depths as he's finally admitted it and the interview will be aired later this week.

Apparently he's also going to testify against UCI officials that may have helped conceal drug use within cycling. Sh1tstorm to come me thinks.

I couldn't care less about Armstrong at this point but I wonder will this have an effect on other sports and PED use within those.

Hahahaha that's hilarious :pac:

Inspector Coptoor

Usain Bolt & the Jamaican sprinters will be next.

cc87

Scuba Ste wrote: »

I thought I'd drag this back up from the depths as he's finally admitted it and the interview will be aired later this week.

Apparently he's also going to testify against UCI officials that may have helped conceal drug use within cycling. Sh1tstorm to come me thinks.

I couldn't care less about Armstrong at this point but I wonder will this have an effect on other sports and PED use within those.

The UCI seem like one of the dodgiest crowds out there from everything that has come out over the last few years. If LA does come out properly against them it will be interesting as AFAIK he has "donated" a nice bit of money to them over the years.

Didnt some of the lads who were involved in the WADA case against LA approach UCI a number of years ago but were ignored by them?

Aquarius34

I am not interested in this story tbh, but if this is such big news, then why are people not gunning down everyone else who is doping in sports? It's pretty rampant now. I don't really care about people taking drugs personally. If you're going to take them that's your own choice. But it's a different story when it comes to been an athlete and taking drugs in sports.

Drugs ruin the spirit of what sports is all about. If some are cheating and others are not, then it's not a game anymore it's a fraud.
I really get annoyed when people lie about taking drugs and claim to take such titles as if they worked they way up natural . It's like, if you're doping and you go around claiming that you are naturally good at whatever competitive sport, it just makes you look weaker than you really are.

Sports is about pushing you to the test and setting your goals to win to the finish line. That's accomplishment. If you win a title and you're doping. Well it proves you didn't win the drugs won. You haven't accomplished your goals by yourself.

So the reality is, we either all dope in sports or none of us do. The sport industry today is ruined by the drug scene. It's time to be upfront about this issue. It's so ridiculous at this point that athletes will admit to almost anything and even admitting to taking other illegal substances before they'd ever admit to taking sport enhancing drugs. You can't clam to be natural if you take drugs, it's as simple as that. If you want to take drugs, play in sports where all competitors are on drugs. Let all the drugs users battle it out to be the biggest drug lord of the dopies!

Ares

Hanley wrote: »

This is all getting very interesting. Can't wait for it all to be over so someone can write a book on it!

Genuine question, how do you feel with regards to this case? I mean everything you said five months ago have been proven to absolutely and categorically wrong.

You don't seem to have reappraised what you said previously, or made any attempt to say, I might have been wrong their or that your opinion has changed.

What I want to know is has it changed, or are the Frenchies, the US courts, Kimmage, Walsh, Emma O'Reilly, Betsy Andreu and cancer haters still out to get Lance?

Hanley wrote: »

Dont get me started. It's a ****ing disgrace.

USADA have no authority to tell UCI what to do anyway.

Hanley wrote: »

He's fought it 3 times. The French went on a witch hunt 2x, THE US FEDERAL COURT F*CKING TOOK HIM ON AND LOST, there is nothing left to prove. He's beaten cancer, the world's best athletes, and the US and French justice system. The only thing that's "beaten" him is a committee which has decided to convict him with no evidence. You can't prove a negative. Complete bullsh*t.

Hanley wrote: »

No. I'm a spam bot. would you like to buy some cheese.

If there was evidence, it would be EVERYWHERE by now. And by "evidence", I mean actual hard test results. A and B samples testing negative. But there isn't. Why is that...? The silence is deafening.

Do I believe he's fully clean? Probably. Has he operated in line with the system of detection and the rules at hand? 100%.

Hanley wrote: »

As far as I'm aware the UCI are considering a legal challenge against the USADA on it?! I'd expect to see it go thru WADA and CAS for sure.

Hanley wrote: »

If someone beats the system, then the system is f*cked. Superior performance and enemies with an axe to grind shouldn't be grounds for the presumption of guilt. I'd have been screwed in PL if that was the case considering how many times I was tested.

The amount of tests and processes LA underwent were rigourous. He's either the smartest and most careful man alive with the best lab techs in the world, the system is brutal, or he is clean. Any way, he hasn't tested positive.

Hanley wrote: »

If he was such a good doper and forcing it on his teammates, why did they test positive/get caught?

It's funny that athletes who have been caught are now trying to wash their hands of it and blame Armstrong for "making" them do it.

As for Emma O'Reilly, I could be REALLY cynical and say her "nice quiet life" has become boring and she wants some publicity.

Aren't a lot of his blood tests still held? Now that they apparently know what they're looking for can they not test retrospectively?

How many times has he been tested over his career and not provided positive As and Bs?

I don't want to put my fingers in my ears and go "la-la-la", but why is there no evidence. If I committed a murder, but a body, weapons or footage was never found, could I be convicted based off what people were saying?!

Hanley

Ares wrote: »

Genuine question, how do you feel with regards to this case? I mean everything you said five months ago have been proven to absolutely and categorically wrong.

You don't seem to have reappraised what you said previously, or made any attempt to say, I might have been wrong their or that your opinion has changed.

What I want to know is has it changed, or are the Frenchies, the US courts, Kimmage, Walsh, Emma O'Reilly, Betsy Andreu and cancer haters still out to get Lance?

Read what I actually said, not what you think I said. And read it in context. It all still applies. There's nothing "wrong" there.

Find a post where I believed Armstrong was drug free (don't bother wasting your time - there is none). All my posts are in relation to how the case was conducted. And as someone who's had similar accusations thrown at them, I still think it was a bull**** investigation carried out as a witch hunt.

Armstrong's "actual" doping status is not something I've ever questioned.

A P

Here you go:

Hanley wrote: »

Do I believe he's fully clean? Probably.

Scuba Ste

onlyup wrote: »

Hahahaha that's hilarious :pac:

I know right. I don't get it

Aquarius34 wrote: »

Drugs ruin the spirit of what sports is all about. If some are cheating and others are not, then it's not a game anymore it's a fraud.
I really get annoyed when people lie about taking drugs and claim to take such titles as if they worked they way up natural . It's like, if you're doping and you go around claiming that you are naturally good at whatever competitive sport, it just makes you look weaker than you really are.

Well your assuming some are not. There's a certain amount of naivety in that as well as the assumption that an athlete on PED's isn't working very hard to be the best. I'd be almost certain the LA trained as bloody hard as any athlete to get where he did. You can't win the TdF by sitting on the couch eating corn flakes sprinkled with EPO. Not to mention all his competitors have been caught using too. None of that takes away from the fact he was cheating and should suffer the same consequences as others that have been caught but pro sports are knee deep in PED use as far I'm concerned. Also I kind of disagree apologists that say everyone is using so it's equal anyway. It's not. LA had resources not available to everyone and I'd imagine that put him ahead of most. I don't particularly like PED use but I don't see a way around it other than actions like this and hopefully improved testing in the future (now who's naive).

Hanley wrote:

I still think it was a bull**** investigation carried out as a witch hunt.

Was it really? He was using. He was one of the most successful athletes ever. Could the ADA's really let that go? You could argue the ends justify the means. Armstrong probably did.

Hanley

A P wrote: »

Here you go:

That should say "probably not". It's a typo. Move on.

Happyman42

Hanley wrote: »

That should say "probably not". It's a typo. Move on.

I sympathise with you, I keep telling my wife that instead of saying 'I do', I MEANT to say 'I do not'.

SteelyDanJalapeno

Hanley wrote: »

That should say "probably not". It's a typo. Move on.

:pac:

ronan45

Ive said it before ill say it again

There should be 2 seperate Camps

Drugs users and non Drug users

I would love to see some doped up roid monster smash Bolts record by 5 or 6 seconds :cool: Would make for great entertainment

Hanley

ronan45 wrote: »

Ive said it before ill say it again

There should be 2 seperate Camps

Drugs users and non Drug users

I would love to see some doped up roid monster smash Bolts record by 5 or 6 seconds :cool: Would make for great entertainment

The most likely scenario is that Bolt would come out and smash it...

Dave 101

ronan45 wrote: »

Ive said it before ill say it again

There should be 2 seperate Camps

Drugs users and non Drug users

I would love to see some doped up roid monster smash Bolts record by 5 or 6 seconds :cool: Would make for great entertainment

Wouldn't happen, if you took more stuff the bolt it would be a case of diminishing returns, there's only so much you could take before it would give negative results

Inspector Coptoor

Hanley wrote: »

The most likely scenario is that Bolt would come out and smash it...

Yeah - cause he's on like Donkey Kong

myflipflops

Hanley wrote: »

Read what I actually said, not what you think I said. And read it in context. It all still applies. There's nothing "wrong" there.

Find a post where I believed Armstrong was drug free (don't bother wasting your time - there is none). All my posts are in relation to how the case was conducted. And as someone who's had similar accusations thrown at them, I still think it was a bull**** investigation carried out as a witch hunt.

Armstrong's "actual" doping status is not something I've ever questioned.

So you still believe that it is 'a f**cking disgrace' as you wrote before?

Not a disgrace what Armstrong has done over the last 15 years but a disgrace that people went to such lengths to go after him and show him up for what he is?

Aquarius34

He offered to go on Oprah, he's asking for it!, seriously... What I find odd is people still paying attention to this. All roid heads are cheaters and I think it's time for them to come to terms with it. I don't understand how people can lie to themselves and call themselves natural when they are not.

Gummy Panda

Aquarius34 wrote: »

He offered to go on Oprah, he's asking for it!, seriously... What I find odd is people still paying attention to this. All roid heads are cheaters and I think it's time for them to come to terms with it. I don't understand how people can lie to themselves and call themselves natural when they are not.

If they are all using PEDs, how is it cheating?

People are never going to be honest when honesty gets you a prison sentence

Oryx

Gummy Panda wrote: »

If they are all using PEDs, how is it cheating?

Those who refuse to dope are squeezed out of the sport.
It is hidden.
It lies to the public about what is naturally achievable.
It is physically damaging (riders have died).
The rules say your ride clean. If youre careless with the rules anyway, why not just disregard all rules and ride a bloody motorbike?

Just because it is common and hard to detect does not mean we should accept it. It removes the whole reasoning behind competition. Instead of pitting your natural ability against others, youre pitting your wallet and pharmaceutical nous against your competitors.

People are never going to be honest when honesty gets you a prison sentence

People generally dont break the law BECAUSE of the threat of a prison sentence.....

mattser

Just wondering. Does anyone have even the slightest bit of compassion for LA ?

Oryx

mattser wrote: »

Just wondering. Does anyone have even the slightest bit of compassion for LA ?

Im waiting to see the interview to see exactly how cynical I should be.

Gummy Panda

Oryx wrote: »

People generally dont break the law BECAUSE of the threat of a prison sentence.....

No but he wants people to be honest and open about PED use. No one is going to be honest with the threat of prison and loss of sponsership.

Its like Christian Boeving when he admitted PED use and got dropped by sponser. Everyone knew he was using PEDs except the most naive.

EDIT: I know he is a bad example but I can't think of any sports star that admitted PED uses who then didn't turn around and blame all their ills on it

Dave 101

mattser wrote: »

Just wondering. Does anyone have even the slightest bit of compassion for LA ?

Definitely, he just did wat everyone else did, the sport is full of users even at the low level,I remember back in '99 I witnessed a cyclist receive peds he was a top 5 in Ireland so I was told and tat everyone he knew around him was using, and it's the same in every sport, all Olympians and others that are at the top of there sport are using something and if people don't beleive tat there naive

myflipflops

mattser wrote: »

Just wondering. Does anyone have even the slightest bit of compassion for LA ?

What are people supposed to have compassion for?

Gummy Panda wrote: »

If they are all using PEDs, how is it cheating?

Ignoring that massive flaws in the idea that it is ok because 'they were all doing it', read the below piece on Armstrong from The Science of Sport site, specifically point 3.

http://www.sportsscientists.com/2013/01/guest-post-last-lance.html

Science of Sport wrote:

3. "If Lance doped, it doesn't matter - everyone else was doping too, so it was a level playing field"

This is another common defence, and it leads to all kinds of bizarre justifications of Armstrong's success and why he should be left alone. It's also frustratingly wrong, for three reasons.

First, remember that doping was illegal, which means that even though everyone may have been doing it, they were doing it with the pressure of a legal system on them. That means that some will have been brazen enough to try more than others. You are not seeing a level playing field because not every athlete is willing to risk as much given that there are penalties for cheating. And while the testing may have been grossly inadequate, as I explained above, it still forced athletes to take risks and spend more money to get away with doping. Therefore, the results of the race were strongly influenced by who was most successful at doing the illegal thing, who wanted to take the most risk, and who had the best systems to help them get away with the illegal action. That in turn is a function of money and power, but nowhere in this does being the best cyclist factor in. And yes, the playing field is never even, but when money, power and an appetite for illegal behavior affect results more than physiology and training, there's a problem.

Secondly, there is no doubt at all that drugs affect people differently. You and I may take two aspirin for a headache. Mine gets worse, you fall asleep 30 minutes later. Individual differences mean that you cannot assume, even if everyone dopes the same (which they don't - see previous point), that the race is equal.

And third, it's irrelevant anyway. I'm baffled by this pseudo-justification of Armstrong's doping because other guys were doping too. They should be viewed as parallel cases, that have cross-threads linking them (they're all in the same race, for example), but how does Ullrich's doping make Armstrong's or Basso's any less wrong? Surely the moral compass that is the foundation of all sport requires that everyone obey the rules that they have accepted in the first place?

If every single investment banker on Wall Street was dishonest and committing fraud, does that mean that none are in the wrong? Are Madoff and Stanford less guilty because fraud is widespread? If a student cheats on an exam to get into University, is that condoned as long as he's not the only one cheating?

Related to this is the idea that Armstrong's titles should be left alone because those who he beat have also been convicted of doping. As this graphic illustrates, the list of dopers in the Top 10 of the Tour de France is long, and if Armstrong is not the champion, who is? Ullrich, Zulle, Basso, Vinokourov, Rumsas are names on the podium with Armstrong. It would be laughable to take Armstrong's titles away and award them to a known doper.

But this is not a reason to do something. Perhaps the best action is to either leave the winner of those Tours blank, with the statement "No official winner due to doping controversies", or keep the names of the winners with a giant asterisk that acknowledges their place as champions of what was actually just a giant pharmacological experiment.

To defend Armstrong on this basis is symptomatic of the mindset that pushed cycling into this situation in the first place - cheating was condoned on the basis that it was a "necessary evil", "just to keep up". And believe me, I'm sympathetic to the plight of cyclists who face this decision. David Millar faced it. Jonathan Vaughters faced it, and both have written of the conflict they faced. Not everyone gives in. I dare say I'm grateful I didn't have to make such a decision, because I don't know that I would've resisted.

That confession out the way, my point is that we know others doped too. Many have been caught. To allow an athlete to get away with it for that reason is just not good enough. If there is a rule, then it must be enforced as many times as is necessary.

Scuba Ste

mattser wrote: »

Just wondering. Does anyone have even the slightest bit of compassion for LA ?

A teeny bit. No other athlete has had to go through this kind of public shaming. From some sources you'd think he was a murderer not an athlete that took PED's (which isn't that bad really). Still his public image and success left him open to it. I wonder if thinks 'I should have left it one or two, why did I have to win seven, stupid Lance, stupid, stupid'.

He's received a lifetime ban and the loss of all his TdF medals while some others are back cycling and winning again.

Scuba Ste

Gummy Panda wrote: »

If they are all using PEDs, how is it cheating?

Because he got caught .

mcmoustache

The whole witch-hunt defence is nonsense.

Lance was the biggest fish of all in that sport and made plenty from the media spotlight on him. He enjoyed it and made the most of it.

He made himself a high profile figure. It was his choice. As a result, of course he was going to show up on people's radar.

Plenty of smaller fish have been caught and punished - there is no reason why lance should have been left alone and plenty of reasons to go after him.

This is no more a witch-hunt than the pursuit of Al Capone.

Aquarius34

Gummy Panda wrote: »

If they are all using PEDs, how is it cheating?

People are never going to be honest when honesty gets you a prison sentence

Are you actually been for real standing by that statement "everyone" takes steroids. No everyone does not take steroids. It seems like you're defending this case, and to why I do not even want to know. Steroids are drugs and you're not a true athlete if you use drugs to help you to reach your goals.

Second point. The law is not their biggest worry, it's been found out by the sports field. They don't want to be stripped from their titles. Could you do less with the bluffing, those kind of response are so 1990................

Gummy Panda

Aquarius34 wrote: »

Are you actually been for real standing by that statement "everyone" takes steroids. No everyone does not take steroids. It seems like you're defending this case, and to why I do not even want to know. Steroids are drugs and you're not a true athlete if you use drugs to help you to reach your goals.

Second point. The law is not their biggest worry, it's been found out by the sports field. They don't want to be stripped from their titles. Could you do less with the bluffing, those kind of response are so 1990................

I don't even know what that last line is suppose to mean