Discredited article bro that guy is not Usain Bolt’s coach.. And many years ago urine samples. would not stand up in a legitimate court of law. Basically Lance lives here.. And the general public backs him.. Recognizes him and his accomplishments.. Cycling fans can all fit into one pub and talk about what a scumbag he is/was.. I have read his statement.. i can see his point.
- The Usain Bolt article was actually put forward as a defence of Armstrong. Whatever he has done, he is not the only one. In this case, I gave an example from a completely different discipline that argues that doping is universal amongst top level athletes. Is your argument that actually it only happens in cycling?
- Which general public are you referring to please? This is an international board, so your statement that “Basically Lance lives here.. And the general public backs him..” is at best vague.
- Cycling fans could possibly fit into one pub, in the same sort of philosophical exercise that says angels could dance on the head of a pin. Cycling fans where? Worldwide? That’d need a pretty big pub.
- I’m sure you can see his point. But by the sound of it he’s a local hero of yours, and I suspect it would take something incredible for you to doubt his account.
Armstrong has been beating the odds and his more experienced competitors since he started competitive sports as a kid. He’s not normal. It doesn’t mean he’s doping.
According to this article, different bodies respond differently to EPO. It could be that what made Armstrong so dominant was that his body responded better to EPO than the other cheaters’ bodies did.
I have read nothing from the USADA to say that re-testing of these old samples formed any part of their case.
Why? I asked this upthread of another poster and the response was silence, and I imagine I’ll get the same from you.
LA has a great strategic PR team and they hammer this “witch hunt” line unmercifully, and it works beautifully on people like you. You just seem to lap it up and take it at face value, without any scepticism whatever. Even though the only person saying this stuff is the person with obvious self interest to be spewing BS, and there are never, ever any specifics given as to exactly what is so wrong about the USADA’s procedures that LA won’t get a fair hearing.
It’s amazing what you can get away with, through sheer chutzpah, particularly if you are well liked. LA tells you to pay no attention to the man behind the curtain, so you just don’t.
You seem to have little familiarity with what’s going on.
The accusations have been going on for his whole career, true, but not from the USADA. They have only been investigating this for a couple years. They don’t go after people unless they have evidence. They don’t just one day say, “Let’s try to bust Lance Armstrong.” Some evidence of doping has to be presented to them in the form of test results, non-testing analytic data (biopassport), witnesses, et cetera.
I already posted about the “never failed a test” claim. Anyone who says that is clearly just reading superficial stories or Armstrong press releases. He tested positive for cortisone during the 1999 Tour de France but the UCI went against their own rules and allowed a back-dated TUE to be presented after the test. His stored blood samples from previous Tours have also tested positive for EPO, though well after the fact.
He may not be on the cycling ProTour anymore but he is not retired. As someone who competes in Ironman events, he has agreed to still be bound by the USADA arbitration and WADA anti-doping rules. He also owns part of a U23 cycling team, Bontranger Livestrong. It is very appropriate to make sure he is no longer involved in pro cycling if he is guilty. The others charged include three team doctors, the team director Johan Bruneel, and one other I forget (team trainer?). Since Bruneel still is a team director and the doctors still ply their trade to pro riders, it’s also very appropriate that they be banned. Bruneel is the only one I know of so far that has agreed to arbitration.
Finally, he had the opportunity to prove his innocence by going to arbitration. He was smart not to because the evidence I’ve read about seems overwhelming. It’s much smarter to do what he is doing and simply fight in the court of public opinion, plus he may try to take it back to court.
Actually, now that I checked the article again, it makes a more general point about different bodies responding differently to different drugs, but I think the argument still applies.
Cortisone? That isn’t a performance-enhancing drug, it’s an anti-inflammatory cortico-steroid. I’ve had several injections myself into my shoulder. 
Yeah, but I saw how fast you biked to the Walgreens to get the prescription filled.
This is not how it works in the United States.
-
In order to even warrant a response from me, the state first has to get an indictment by presenting the preliminary evidence to a grand jury of my peers, and get them to agree that there’s some chance I’m guilty.
-
Then they have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt in front of a regular jury of my peers that I’m guilty. I’m allow to present evidence in my favor and cross-examine their witnesses, but even if I don’t bother doing any of that, they don’t get to declare me guilty just because I don’t actively defend myself.
-
If they fail to do so, they don’t ever get to try me for the same crime again.
None of these protections are seeming to exist for LA, thought I’d be happy to learn that I misunderstand.
By the way, sorry for the misspelling of Bruyneel.
It seems like a simple rule to stop this sort of never ending bullshit would be to allow testing following the event within whatever rules apply at the time and that if nothing is found then the medals are awarded and the samples destroyed. No taksie backsies. It’s a sport, after all. Why are we wasting so much effort on inconsequentials?
Yeah! (shakes fist)
Because no drug can be used in ways aside from the intended use?
From what I’ve read on cycling forums, cortisone in high doses can help burn fat and protein when glycogen stores are depleted.
Regardless, it was and is banned.
Of course they can, I just had never heard such things about cortisone before. I am not disputing what you say, though. It’s just news to me, that’s all.
I honestly have no clue why many things are on the banned list. I know there are a few main reasons used. It’s purely a PED, it can be used as a masking agent, or it can be combined with other drugs for one of the former effects.
Some are also prohibited even though they don’t increase performance, like many recreational drugs, though those usually are only prohibited during competition rather than being banned at all times. (This is why Tom Boonen was never sanctioned for a cocaine positive by WADA or UCI though he was barred by individual races the Tours of Switzerland and France after the positive.)
What you’ve described is the process for convicting someone of a criminal offence. LA hasn’t been charged with a criminal offence. He’s been alleged to have cheated at sport.
Further, when he signed on to compete in that sport he signed up to rules which included rules about arbitration. The USADA invoked relevant arbitration procedures. Armstrong is getting treatment precisely in accordance with the procedures he signed up to.
“This is not how it works in the United States”, you say. Pardon me but what the hell do you think the “US” in USADA stands for precisely?
Further, recently Armstrong asked an Austin Federal Court judge to decide if those arbitration procedures would be fair. The court said those procedures would be fair. That would be the Federal Court of the United States, by the way. Do you want to explain to that court how it “works in the United States”? Perhaps they need a lesson.
Does Armstrong accept the finding that he asked for, from the United States court he chose? Hell no, he issues another bald faced press release continuing to whine that the *United States *Anti-Doping Agency arbitration would have been unfair.
Great news for cycling, and clean sport in general.
Great news for the few real cycling journalists like David Walsh and Paul Kimmage who were willing to expose this long ago, great news for Christophe Bassons, Filippo Simeoni and all the others who faced the consequences of facing up to this bully and fraud.
http://autobus.cyclingnews.com/results/1999/jul99/jul18.shtml
Christ on a cracker dude, did you even read the post I responded to? Here it is again:
Yes, I’m aware LA isn’t being charged criminally here, but if Askance is going to claim this is just like any other court, I get to rebut that.
I hope cycling knows the damage their doing to the sport. Lance is the cycling equivalent of Michael Jordan. He made a somewhat dull sport interesting to a mass audience. I was never much of a cycling fan, but I did make an effort to watch his last few Tour de France races. Lance put a name to cycling and got it on tv. Just like McEnroe and Chris Evert got major tv coverage of tennis. Basketball was losing it’s audience in the 70’s and early 80’s. Jordan, Larry Bird, and Magic Johnson brought back the excitement. Every sport needs it’s champions.
I understand the need to clean up and have a drug free cycling sport. What I don’t understand is the ill conceived obsession with busting nearly every major cycling champion in the past decade. Several other names have been mentioned in this thread and the other Lance thread. Cycling needs to look forward and not backward. Let the past alone. Accept the fact that the sport wasn’t clean. Do better in the future.