The thing I don’t understand in all of this is what authority does USADA have to strip him of his medals? It seems like it should be up to the Tour De France officials to revoke his titles, not some independent agency. Does this authority extend to awards in the NFL, NBA, or MLB? Can they take away a Cy Young award or Golden Glove?
My understanding is that the USADA serve a prosecuting brief and invite the defendant to arbitrate within a certain time, with a certain penalty to follow in default. Armstrong elected to default, so the penalty automatically follows. No further weighing of evidence follows.
Shoeless, I’m curious about that also. I suspect that USADA is some sort of delegate authority of the WADA and that the TdF is somehow sanctioned or approved by the WADA in a manner that gives WADA some control. I really haven’t been able to find a coherent explanation of that aspect.
This.
Not failing a test could mean that he competed within the rules in effect at the time.
I’ve always held out the benefit of the doubt, since the claims of his critics have always seemed to rely so heavily on conjecture, assumption, and burden-shifting. And I have to wonder whether the evidence that USADA has assembled so long after the fact would have stood up to attack.
But if Armstrong’s not going to resist, why should I? I find his stated reasons for not fighting not credible, like a politician saying he wants to spend more time with his family. I have to conclude that he decided that the proceeding would discredited him, and he’s obviously in the best position to know.
Neither EPO use nor autologous blood transfusions were within the rules of the TdF at the relevant times.
I’ve always wanted to believe he really was clean. I can’t do that anymore. I’m still not 100% sure he cheated, but at this point it really is up to him to answer the charges or have people assume he was. There have been aspects of this case that strongly resemble a witch hunt, but that doesn’t change the current situation.
It’s a sad day for a variety of reasons.
If they can’t test for it, they shouldn’t be making rules banning it.
And, if it’s as everyone says, and everyone is doping, doesn’t that mean that Armstrong would have still won if no one was doping?
I never really got into the minituea of the evidence against Lance Armstrong, which is probably exactly what Lance Armstrong wants. He gets to proclaim he never failed a test, while knowing that that result is of little import as to whether or not he was doping in real life.
I really don’t think I want to get into it all right now either. Which, once again, is what Lance Armstrong wants. He needs to avoid having an arbitration hearing, with the presentation of evidence and witnesses and judgments based on evidence and not on “Ooooo, he’s a cancer survivor”, “I have a Livestrong wristband!”, “I don’t like that Floyd Landis guy and Taylor Hamilton looks untrustworthy” and “He’s never failed a test!” that wins him the case in the court of public opinion. So rather than actually fight it, he, in a coincidence of epic performance, tires of the fight now rather than any time in the last few years. Talk about poor timing.
Maybe someday, when I have time, I’ll get into the meat of the allegations, including the 5 guys on his postal team who were lined up to testify, the retests of his old samples, and the like. But now my opportunity to hear it from an arbitration hearing is done. C’est La Vie.
That’s pretty ridiculous.
If the TdF titles are stripped from LA, and it holds up, just who do you give the title to? Wasn’t every GC contender taking PEDs during the time LA won his 7 titles? Further, who got tested during the TdF during LA’s run? Was it totally random throughout the peloton, or did they only test stage winners, or what? Seems ridiculous to strip LA, in order to give the title to a “clean” contestant who wasn’t tested as often as LA.
FWIW, I think LA was using PEDs during his streak, but then again, I think every other GC or other jersey contender was too. Just too many guys (Riis, Pantani, Ullrich—the ecstasy hit wasn’t performance enhancing, IMO), being tied to or admitting PED use later, who never tested dirty while they were competing.
And I see BigT’s point: what is the point of banning a substance that you can’t test for? Get PEDs out of the shadows and let’s get some more, good studies out in the open on the pluses and minuses of these substances.
There is a fringe group that lays at least part of the blame for doping at the feet of the venerable UCI. Every year, they tighten the reins on what is an acceptable bicycle (can you use a slotted fork to reduce wind drag from the front tire?) because the race is about the rider, not the bike. Hence, innovation is applied to enhancing the rider, so doping will become inevitable. (The fringe is led by serious and casual recumbent bike riders who feel frustration at being excluded from most competition.)
I believe Bruyneel is still taking his case to arbitration, so you may get to hear some relevant testimony.
No, just because a person can get away with something is little reason to permit the inapproproate activity.
No, if everyone was caught, then there would be no winner.
In practical terms, yes. Armstrong was still faster than Floyd Landis. Ceremonially, though, they can’t really award a title on that basis. And there may have been someone in the pack who wasn’t doping, although presumably that person would never be able to prove it.
In practical terms is it true speed being measured? Or is it the correct mix of chemistry and a better timing of the doping cycles?
Does the USADA have any sort of double jeopardy concept?
Suppose, for the sake of argument, that he’s innocent. He never took any banned substance, never doped. Suppose he’s telling the truth that he’s tired of fighting.
If he kept fighting and won this round, would they go away? I don’t think so. And speculation has already tarnished his image. If he were, hypothetically, innocent, the USADA is making sure nobody would believe it.
I find the idea that LA would relinquish his Tour-de-France titles, his entire legacy, just because he’s tired of ‘fighting the good fight’; to be highly incredible.
He knows full well a large segment of the population will always believe anything he says and now they look upon him as a martyr. That is no small thing. Also, this way all the gathered evidence will remain hidden.
I don’t like Lance but nice move. It was his only way out.
Is there a cycling equivalent to “I’m gonna take my ball and go home?” Because that’s what this is. Great fundraiser that he has been for cancer causes and great symbol and everything else, it was obvious long ago that he was doping like crazy and it’s just as obvious that the testing was laughably bad.
I’m not sure Armstrong thought (as many still don’t) that the USADA could strip him of his Tour de France titles. I don’t see how they can.