# Bitches, I told you so... (Lance Armstrong related) **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [August 24, 2005, 2:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bitches-i-told-you-so-lance-armstrong-related/318421 "2005-08-24T14:12:47Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Trunk](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/87869e/32.png) [@Trunk](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trunk)\ **Post date:** [August 24, 2005, 3:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bitches-i-told-you-so-lance-armstrong-related/318421/21 "2005-08-24T15:55:34Z")
_L’Equipe_ has always been out to get Lance. No doubt. But, this situation will go down just like the rest of the dope accusations against Lance. Those like **threemae** will see it as more evidence to throw on the pile and concluded with all these smoking guns, one must have been fired. Others will be able to poke holes in it and mentally toss it away as they have the accusations by the journalists, the trainers, the cleaning ladies, etc. etc. etc. As far as I’m concerned, this newest story doesn’t change the “lance/drug atmostphere” at all, and so I say. . .“whatever.” ---
**Author:** ![Gangster\_Octopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/a8b319/32.png) [@Gangster\_Octopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gangster_Octopus)\ **Post date:** [August 24, 2005, 4:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bitches-i-told-you-so-lance-armstrong-related/318421/22 "2005-08-24T16:53:16Z")
[Can You Even Test For EPO after Six Years](http://www.velonews.com/news/fea/8746.0.html) > [@](#): > > Doctor Christiane Ayotte, director of the Doping Control Laboratory at Montreal’s Institut National de la Recherché Scientifique, said that the L’Equipe story, outlining charges that seven-time Tour de France winner had used EPO at the 1999 edition of the race, raised several important scientific and ethical questions, beginning with the assertion that France’s anti-doping lab had tested frozen urine samples five years after the fact. > > “I don’t dispute their findings,” Ayotte said. “If there’s residual EPO after five years, it was properly identified. We are not that lucky here.” > > “We are extremely surprised that urine samples could have been tested in 2004 and have revealed the presence of EPO,” Ayotte said in an interview with VeloNews on Tuesday. “EPO - in its natural state or the synthesized version - is not stable in urine, even if stored at minus 20 degrees.” ---
**Author:** ![carterba](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/85e7bf/32.png) [@carterba](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/carterba)\ **Post date:** [August 24, 2005, 5:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bitches-i-told-you-so-lance-armstrong-related/318421/23 "2005-08-24T17:06:42Z")
> [@bordelond](#): > > Is it reasonable or unreasonable to just presume that _all_ high-level cyclists are doped in _all_ competitions, and just consider it pretty much a wash when someone screws up and gets busted. > > Dumb, trite quote – but it’s apparently taken to heart by many athletes in many sports: > > _“If you aren’t cheating, you aren’t trying” – Jim Rome_ > > Is it wrong to consider doping to be just the basic cost of doing business in high level cycling? Personally I suspect they’re all on something, and I really couldn’t care less. But I don’t like the way Lance Armstrong gets singled out as the only rider worthy of suspicion when everyone who finishes in the top 10 of a grand Tour is doing things just as amazing (from a “distance from the mean” perspective) as him. Why are Ivan Basso, Jan Ullrich, et al. beyond suspicion? As for this latest “revelation”, I have serious doubts, for all the same reasons everyone else has brought up. ---
**Author:** ![Trunk](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/87869e/32.png) [@Trunk](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trunk)\ **Post date:** [August 24, 2005, 5:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bitches-i-told-you-so-lance-armstrong-related/318421/24 "2005-08-24T17:44:39Z")
> [@Airman Doors](#): > > I don’t know if any French riders have tested positive, but there have been a lot of positives. Airman, meet [Richard Virenque](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Virenque), a massively popular French cyclist who was busted. Funny thing is, now the French (so I’ve heard) have welcomed him back with open arms. He does the French language broadcasts of TdF and is popular (I read an article about it, probably velonews but I’ll be damned if I’ll track it down). Lance has even said as much, “you love and cheer for Virenque, but you ridicule me and I’ve never tested positive.” I’m not blaming the FRENCH (I like France) but there’s definitely an element in that country that is really out to discredit Lance. You don’t see this kind of press in Spain, Italy or Germany. Granted, Lance doesn’t usually race there, but it still appears to be some people’s goal in life to nail Lance. ---
**Author:** ![yojimbo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/yojimbo/32/232_2.png) [@yojimbo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/yojimbo)\ **Post date:** [August 24, 2005, 6:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bitches-i-told-you-so-lance-armstrong-related/318421/25 "2005-08-24T18:10:53Z")
You guys that think this is an anti-American thing need to rethink. Yes they’re gunning for Lance but that’s because he has made himself the big target. Not only is he the unquestioned leader of the sport he his also one of the most outspoken about drugs. Add to that the whole demigod thing that happened after the cancer and you’ve got a man with a HUGE target on his back. Stories about Lance sell copies. Much like the press would have loved to get Carl Lewis the want Armstrong. I’ve been following this story on TV news and radio talk shows. I do watch the Tour De France but that’s my only glimpse of the world of cycling. I have noticed though that a lot of cycling journalists and sport analysts seem to come down on the side that he’s almost certainly guilty but the current circumstantial and hard evidence isn’t strong enough to actually prove it. ---
**Author:** ![yojimbo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/yojimbo/32/232_2.png) [@yojimbo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/yojimbo)\ **Post date:** [August 24, 2005, 6:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bitches-i-told-you-so-lance-armstrong-related/318421/26 "2005-08-24T18:16:37Z")
> [@yojimbo](#): > > I have noticed though that a lot of cycling journalists and sport analysts seem to come down on the side that he’s almost certainly guilty but the current circumstantial and hard evidence isn’t strong enough to actually prove it. Forgot to add that they also say the problem is huge sport wide and by no means just limited to just Lance and team. ---
**Author:** ![Cat\_Whisperer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cat_whisperer/32/4839_2.png) [@Cat\_Whisperer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cat_Whisperer)\ **Post date:** [August 24, 2005, 6:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bitches-i-told-you-so-lance-armstrong-related/318421/27 "2005-08-24T18:22:39Z")
To get to the real heart of the matter, we have to change it to “Cheese-eating, Lance-hating Surrender Monkeys”? ---
**Author:** ![MaddyStrut](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/dbc845/32.png) [@MaddyStrut](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MaddyStrut)\ **Post date:** [August 24, 2005, 9:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bitches-i-told-you-so-lance-armstrong-related/318421/28 "2005-08-24T21:14:23Z")
> [@Finagle](#): > > What is the false positive rate on the EPO test? How reliable is it? I haven’t seen that. However, my understanding is that to determine the probability that Lance was doping given one positive test, you’d need to know more than just the false positive rate on the test. You’d also need to know the incidence of doping in the underlying population. It would be like the classic [taxi problem](http://plus.maths.org/issue2/puzzle/taxisolution.html) from stats class. ---
**Author:** ![ouryL](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ouryl/32/6067_2.png) [@ouryL](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ouryL)\ **Post date:** [August 24, 2005, 9:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bitches-i-told-you-so-lance-armstrong-related/318421/29 "2005-08-24T21:27:32Z")
Gespräch zur Hand, Weibchen! :eek: 😃 ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [August 24, 2005, 9:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bitches-i-told-you-so-lance-armstrong-related/318421/30 "2005-08-24T21:32:50Z")
> [@threemae](#): > > He did an absolutely shitty thing last year when he chased down a break with Filip Simeoni and told him to either drop the break or that he wouldn’t leave. Dare I ask what the fuck this means? It’s Sanskrit on two wheels. ---
**Author:** ![ouryL](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ouryl/32/6067_2.png) [@ouryL](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ouryL)\ **Post date:** [August 24, 2005, 9:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bitches-i-told-you-so-lance-armstrong-related/318421/31 "2005-08-24T21:50:04Z")
I would question any tests results revealed as a result of the breaking of the double blind testing procedure. ---
**Author:** ![clairobscur](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/839c29/32.png) [@clairobscur](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/clairobscur)\ **Post date:** [August 24, 2005, 10:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bitches-i-told-you-so-lance-armstrong-related/318421/32 "2005-08-24T22:38:49Z")
> [@bordelond](#): > > Is it reasonable or unreasonable to just presume that _all_ high-level cyclists are doped in _all_ competitions, and just consider it pretty much a wash when someone screws up and gets busted. That’s basically my assumption (I might be flamed for that). I take for granted that every one of them is doped to the eyes, just using methods that currently aren’t detectable (it’s not like the big guys can’t afford the best advisors on this topic). The point mentionned by the OP (the “undoped rider” 's wife caught with stockpiles of EPO) is quite telling IMO. Someone asked about french riders testing positive though I’m not interested in cycling I couldn’t have missed on case involving a famous french rider who was doped, but…err…unknowingly… He just didn’t know. They didn’t tell him. His stance and his poor command of french made the days of comic shows ( “on m’a dopé à l’insu de mon plein gré”…untranslatable), so I couldn’t ignore it. I would add that I don’t understand why french people would have specifically wanted to oust Armstrong. It’s not like lacking him, a french rider would have won instead. If someone has a beef in this story, it should be the americans, for the obvious reason, not the french. What difference would it make whether the winner is an American, a German or an Uzbek? Though it seems to me that the general belief in France is that he was doped. ---
**Author:** ![Skywatcher](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/skywatcher/32/254_2.png) [@Skywatcher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skywatcher)\ **Post date:** [August 24, 2005, 10:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bitches-i-told-you-so-lance-armstrong-related/318421/33 "2005-08-24T22:41:39Z")
> [@clairobscur](#): > > I would add that I don’t understand why french people would have specifically wanted to oust Armstrong. It’s not like lacking him, a french rider would have won instead. If someone has a beef in this story, it should be the americans, for the obvious reason, not the french. What difference would it make whether the winner is an American, a German or an Uzbek? Though it seems to me that the general belief in France is that he was doped. And if he was, those who say he wasn’t have been duped. 😉 ---
**Author:** ![Baldwin](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/baldwin/32/7264_2.png) [@Baldwin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Baldwin)\ **Post date:** [August 24, 2005, 11:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bitches-i-told-you-so-lance-armstrong-related/318421/34 "2005-08-24T23:10:13Z")
**Bitches, I told you so… (Lance Armstrong related)** Nice thread title, **threemae**. So, who are the “bitches”? Are we all the “bitches”? Well, if you’re in fact addressing your fellow denizens of the SDMB, then, yes, you have “told us so”, many times. What you haven’t done is to **prove** anything. Bitch. ---
**Author:** ![Giraffe](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/giraffe/32/129_2.png) [@Giraffe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Giraffe)\ **Post date:** [August 24, 2005, 11:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bitches-i-told-you-so-lance-armstrong-related/318421/35 "2005-08-24T23:11:18Z")
> [@MaddyStrut](#): > > It would be like the classic [taxi problem](http://plus.maths.org/issue2/puzzle/taxisolution.html) from stats class. Your link only gives the solution. What’s the question? ---
**Author:** ![Dead\_Badger](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/848f3c/32.png) [@Dead\_Badger](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dead_Badger)\ **Post date:** [August 24, 2005, 11:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bitches-i-told-you-so-lance-armstrong-related/318421/36 "2005-08-24T23:26:45Z")
> [@Bryan Ekers](#): > > Dare I ask what the fuck this means? It’s Sanskrit on two wheels. It means that in one stage of the Tour, a breakaway formed at the front (i.e. several riders broke free of the main group, or peloton), one of whom was Filip Simeoni. Lance Armstrong had a beef with Simeoni (who was testifying re: EPO against a former Armstrong associate), so he rode down the breakaway group. Breakaways have to cooperate to stay in front, and any breakaway containing an overall Tour contender (i.e. Lance) is more likely to get ridden down by competing teams, who don’t want a Tour contender to make time on the rest of the field. So basically, by joining the breakaway with Simeoni in it, Armstrong made it certain that the group would get caught. However, he made it clear that he’d drop back if Simeoni did so too. Basically, he was making sure that Simeoni didn’t get a stage win, because Simeoni had pissed him (and a lot of other people) off. First [article](http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2004/07/24/1090464904320.html?from=storylhs&oneclick=true) I found, seems explanatory enough… ---
**Author:** ![threemae](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/5f9b8f/32.png) [@threemae](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/threemae)\ **Post date:** [August 24, 2005, 11:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bitches-i-told-you-so-lance-armstrong-related/318421/37 "2005-08-24T23:52:57Z")
> [@Athena](#): > > So once again, the French - who have always had it out for Lance - say that they have proof he’s doping. And the proof is 6 year old samples, that the lab itself “could not confirm that the positive results were Armstrong’s. It noted that the samples were anonymous, bearing only a six-digit number to identify the rider, and could not be matched with the name of any one cyclist.” Of course the lab that did the testing cannot make the match, and it absolutely shouldn’t be able to either. How else would it be possible to carry out annonymous testing? The samples are provided to the lab labeled only with numbers and so their results will only be in terms of numbers not names. Providing the results according to sample number was a requirement of WADA to allow the lab permission to run the tests. This was a lab that had just published in _Nature_ for essentially doing the exact same research with the 1998 Tour samples. The lab had no interest in naming individual riders, just doing research into the feasability of a modern isoform differentiation EPO test on urine frozen for six or seven years. They started with 1998 because of the Festina scandal of that year and found that they could indeed still detect EPO after that time period, identifying it in a larger number of samples, around 20 or so. Again, this research got published in _Nature_, the most prestigious and important general science refereed journal in the world. They simply did a repeat of the research with the 1999 samples and provided results listed by sample numbers as required by WADA to access the samples. **Gangster Octopus** , this research group has obviously proven that one can test for EPO in urine frozen for even longer than 1999, and they got published in _Nature_ for it. That researcher from the Canadian lab was only commenting on the feasability, and said: "Ayotte, director of the World Anti-Doping Agency-certified lab closest to WADA headquarters in Montreal, said she wasn’t surprised that Doctor Jacques de Ceaurriz, director of the French national anti-doping laboratory at Châtenay-Malabry, was confident in the methods, but only that an older sample could be so readily tested. “I don’t dispute their findings,” Ayotte said. “If there’s residual EPO after five years, it was properly identified. We are not that lucky here.” De Ceaurriz and Ayotte agree that if enough Erythropoietin - synthetic or natural - remains in a sample, distinguishing the two is not an issue. Such degradation, both said, does not lead to false positives. “One of two things happens,” De Ceaurriz said. “Either EPO, which is a protein, degrades as time passes and becomes undetectable. In that case we have a negative test result or, as in this case, the EPO persists as it is. We have therefore no doubt about the validity of our results.” " Damn, now I have to work again. ---
**Author:** ![Q.E.D](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/q/51bf81/32.png) [@Q.E.D](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Q.E.D)\ **Post date:** [August 25, 2005, 12:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bitches-i-told-you-so-lance-armstrong-related/318421/38 "2005-08-25T00:04:16Z")
> [@Giraffe](#): > > Your link only gives the solution. What’s the question? [The taxi problem](http://plus.maths.org/issue2/puzzle/taxi.html). ---
**Author:** ![duffer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/duffer/32/1026_2.png) [@duffer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/duffer)\ **Post date:** [August 25, 2005, 12:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bitches-i-told-you-so-lance-armstrong-related/318421/39 "2005-08-25T00:41:50Z")
You saved up for your “gotcha-ya” all this time and bring the hammer down on us with an article from L’Equipe?!? You win. :rolleyes: ---
**Author:** ![Boo\_Boo\_Foo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/e274bd/32.png) [@Boo\_Boo\_Foo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Boo_Boo_Foo)\ **Post date:** [August 25, 2005, 1:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bitches-i-told-you-so-lance-armstrong-related/318421/40 "2005-08-25T01:06:49Z")
My position? I trust the accuracy of the LNDD analyses 100% - and having followed the development of both EPO testing and Blood Doping testing since the Sydney Olympics quite closely, I’ve kept quite a timeline of refinements in both testing procedures at hand for future reference. My position is this - 12 accuracte retrospective EPO positives have been detected by the LNDD from urine samples from 1999. This is a great breakthrough in technology which should be applauded. However, the tests were conducted purely as research with a view to improving retrospective accuracy. There was NOT the normal protection of anonymity in place, and more importantly, there was NOT the normal presumption of innocence which is provided by having a direct 1 to 1 matching extra sample per day. Accordingly, to have released Lance Armstrong’s name without those corroborating extra samples was wholly unethical on the part of L’Equipe. Wholly unethical. In sport, no one is guilty until a postive 2nd sample is proven. Anonymity is guaranteed up until that point to protect the innocent. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bitches-i-told-you-so-lance-armstrong-related/318421.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bitches-i-told-you-so-lance-armstrong-related/318421.md?page=3)