Results 1 to 84 of 84
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Stugotz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    427

    Statement From USADA CEO Travis T. Tygart Regarding The USPS Doping Conspiracy

    Statement From USADA CEO Travis T. Tygart Regarding The U.S. Postal Service Pro Cycling Team Doping Conspiracy

    October 10, 2012

    Today, we are sending the ‘Reasoned Decision’ in the Lance Armstrong case and supporting information to the Union Cycliste International (UCI), the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA), and the World Triathlon Corporation (WTC). The evidence shows beyond any doubt that the US Postal Service Pro Cycling Team ran the most sophisticated, professionalized and successful doping program that sport has ever seen.

    The evidence of the US Postal Service Pro Cycling Team-run scheme is overwhelming and is in excess of 1000 pages, and includes sworn testimony from 26 people, including 15 riders with knowledge of the US Postal Service Team (USPS Team) and its participants’ doping activities. The evidence also includes direct documentary evidence including financial payments, emails, scientific data and laboratory test results that further prove the use, possession and distribution of performance enhancing drugs by Lance Armstrong and confirm the disappointing truth about the deceptive activities of the USPS Team, a team that received tens of millions of American taxpayer dollars in funding.

    Together these different categories of eyewitness, documentary, first-hand, scientific, direct and circumstantial evidence reveal conclusive and undeniable proof that brings to the light of day for the first time this systemic, sustained and highly professionalized team-run doping conspiracy. All of the material will be made available later this afternoon on the USADA website at U.S. Anti-Doping Agency - USADA.

    The USPS Team doping conspiracy was professionally designed to groom and pressure athletes to use dangerous drugs, to evade detection, to ensure its secrecy and ultimately gain an unfair competitive advantage through superior doping practices. A program organized by individuals who thought they were above the rules and who still play a major and active role in sport today.

    The evidence demonstrates that the ‘Code of Silence’ of performance enhancing drug use in the sport of cycling has been shattered, but there is more to do. From day one, we always hoped this investigation would bring to a close this troubling chapter in cycling’s history and we hope the sport will use this tragedy to prevent it from ever happening again.

    Of course, no one wants to be chained to the past forever, and I would call on the UCI to act on its own recent suggestion for a meaningful Truth and Reconciliation program. While we appreciate the arguments that weigh in favor of and against such a program, we believe that allowing individuals like the riders mentioned today to come forward and acknowledge the truth about their past doping may be the only way to truly dismantle the remaining system that allowed this “EPO and Blood Doping Era” to flourish. Hopefully, the sport can unshackle itself from the past, and once and for all continue to move forward to a better future.

    Our mission is to protect clean athletes by preserving the integrity of competition not only for today’s athletes but also the athletes of tomorrow. We have heard from many athletes who have faced an unfair dilemma — dope, or don’t compete at the highest levels of the sport. Many of them abandoned their dreams and left sport because they refused to endanger their health and participate in doping. That is a tragic choice no athlete should have to make.

    It took tremendous courage for the riders on the USPS Team and others to come forward and speak truthfully. It is not easy to admit your mistakes and accept your punishment. But that is what these riders have done for the good of the sport, and for the young riders who hope to one day reach their dreams without using dangerous drugs or methods.

    These eleven (11) teammates of Lance Armstrong, in alphabetical order, are Frankie Andreu, Michael Barry, Tom Danielson, Tyler Hamilton, George Hincapie, Floyd Landis, Levi Leipheimer, Stephen Swart, Christian Vande Velde, Jonathan Vaughters and David Zabriskie.

    The riders who participated in the USPS Team doping conspiracy and truthfully assisted have been courageous in making the choice to stop perpetuating the sporting fraud, and they have suffered greatly. In addition to the public revelations, the active riders have been suspended and disqualified appropriately in line with the rules. In some part, it would have been easier for them if it all would just go away; however, they love the sport, and they want to help young athletes have hope that they are not put in the position they were -- to face the reality that in order to climb to the heights of their sport they had to sink to the depths of dangerous cheating.

    I have personally talked with and heard these athletes’ stories and firmly believe that, collectively, these athletes, if forgiven and embraced, have a chance to leave a legacy far greater for the good of the sport than anything they ever did on a bike.

    Lance Armstrong was given the same opportunity to come forward and be part of the solution. He rejected it.

    Instead he exercised his legal right not to contest the evidence and knowingly accepted the imposition of a ban from recognized competition for life and disqualification of his competitive results from 1998 forward. The entire factual and legal basis on the outcome in his case and the other six active riders’ cases will be provided in the materials made available online later today. Two other members of the USPS Team, Dr. Michele Ferrari and Dr. Garcia del Moral, also received lifetime bans for perpetrating this doping conspiracy.

    Three other members of the USPS Team have chosen to contest the charges and take their cases to arbitration: Johan Bruyneel, the team director; Dr. Pedro Celaya, a team doctor; and Jose “Pepe” Marti, the team trainer. These three individuals will receive a full hearing before independent judges, where they will have the opportunity to present and confront the evidence, cross-examine witnesses and testify under oath in a public proceeding.

    From day one in this case, as in every potential case, the USADA Board of Directors and professional staff did the job we are mandated to do for clean athletes and the integrity of sport. We focused solely on finding the truth without being influenced by celebrity or non-celebrity, threats, personal attacks or political pressure because that is what clean athletes deserve and demand.”


    CONTACT:
    USADA Media Relations
    Phone: (719) 785-2000
    E-mail: media@usada.org

    Link to the original article here.
    Speed Kills...It kills those that don't have it!
    German Engineering in Da Haus, Ja!

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Stugotz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    427
    Last edited by Stugotz; 10-10-2012 at 11:47 AM.
    Speed Kills...It kills those that don't have it!
    German Engineering in Da Haus, Ja!

  3. #3
    zrm
    zrm is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    5,557
    The problem is, they've gone after Armstrong but who do they give the titles they strip him of to? At that level during that era there probably weren't too many clean riders and I don't think too many people think there were. They spend all kinds of time and money to go after and bring down Armstrong only to hand his titles to another doper? It would be great if cycling can have 100% cleanliness, but it would be nice if it can get there without eating itself alive.

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    3,827
    Illuminating. Yowser.

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation: 006_007's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    8,988
    sigh


  6. #6
    banned
    Reputation: roadie scum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    773
    The pursuit of justice should not be likened to beating a dead horse.

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation: skiahh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    3,604
    Quote Originally Posted by zrm View Post
    The problem is, they've gone after Armstrong but who do they give the titles they strip him of to? At that level during that era there probably weren't too many clean riders and I don't think too many people think there were. They spend all kinds of time and money to go after and bring down Armstrong only to hand his titles to another doper? It would be great if cycling can have 100% cleanliness, but it would be nice if it can get there without eating itself alive.
    They ought to just void the races altogether from that era.

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation: zyzbot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    352
    Quote Originally Posted by roadie scum View Post
    The pursuit of justice should not be likened to beating a dead horse.

  9. #9
    No. Just No.
    Reputation: Circlip's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    5,150
    Quote Originally Posted by 006_007 View Post
    sigh
    The horse (donkey?) and it's legal team are still proclaiming they've won the hearts and minds of the people as surely as this guy below. There's still some beatin' left to do here.
    Attached Images Attached Images  

  10. #10
    sock puppet
    Reputation: osokolo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    8,061

    absolutely roadie..

    this is not about Lance, it is way bigger than him...

    it may be the beginning of the healing process for this sport... I certainly hope it is....

    despite popular belief - no one is bigger than the sport itself... reading the evidence will be really fun... in a weird way... i want to know how they did it..

    Quote Originally Posted by roadie scum View Post
    The pursuit of justice should not be likened to beating a dead horse.

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    4,029
    Quote Originally Posted by skiahh View Post
    They ought to just void the races altogether from that era.
    I think that is probably the right answer at the end of the day.
    Riding slowly since 1977.

  12. #12
    Daniel the Dog
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    6,742
    The guys who won the Tour's have all been busted for doing drugs at one point. What is the point? Dead horsing it! Secret Race was an interesting read.

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation: skiahh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    3,604
    Read an article today that said Lance's attorneys are now linking his "persecution" to big tobacco, since he's so anti-tobacco. It said the USADA attorneys are the same ones that Big Tobacco used, so they're in cahoots now against him.

    It's just getting sad now.

  14. #14
    AZ
    AZ is offline
    banned
    Reputation: AZ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    19,201
    Quote Originally Posted by skiahh View Post
    Read an article today that said Lance's attorneys are now linking his "persecution" to big tobacco, since he's so anti-tobacco. It said the USADA attorneys are the same ones that Big Tobacco used, so they're in cahoots now against him.

    It's just getting sad now.



    Yep, 26 people willing to purger themselves aligned with big Tobacco, conspiracy for sure. All it needs is a 2nd gunman to complete the triad.
    Last edited by AZ; 10-10-2012 at 09:05 PM.

  15. #15
    No. Just No.
    Reputation: Circlip's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    5,150
    Quote Originally Posted by skiahh View Post
    Read an article today that said Lance's attorneys are now linking his "persecution" to big tobacco, since he's so anti-tobacco. It said the USADA attorneys are the same ones that Big Tobacco used, so they're in cahoots now against him.

    It's just getting sad now.
    Sad that some of Lance's current legal representation has also had billings with big tobacco in recent years, a fact that his personal attorney Tim Herman conveniently ignores with his statement. Nothing left but to clutch at straws now.

  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation: June Bug's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    1,694
    Quote Originally Posted by Stugotz View Post
    The USPS Team doping conspiracy was professionally designed to groom and pressure athletes to use dangerous drugs, to evade detection, to ensure its secrecy and ultimately gain an unfair competitive advantage through superior doping practices......

    Our mission is to protect clean athletes by preserving the integrity of competition not only for today’s athletes but also the athletes of tomorrow. We have heard from many athletes who have faced an unfair dilemma — dope, or don’t compete at the highest levels of the sport. Many of them abandoned their dreams and left sport because they refused to endanger their health and participate in doping. That is a tragic choice no athlete should have to make......

    From day one in this case, as in every potential case, the USADA Board of Directors and professional staff did the job we are mandated to do for clean athletes and the integrity of sport. We focused solely on finding the truth without being influenced by celebrity or non-celebrity, threats, personal attacks or political pressure because that is what clean athletes deserve and demand.”
    I don't think this was a waste of money. It may be the one thing that really turns the tide on doping. Travis Tygart did his job and did it well.

    I suspect at this point that the LA legal strategies will turn towards limiting financial liability should a civil case move forward to recover ill gotten gains. Interesting to see the next move (if any) from Nike and Michelob.

  17. #17
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    154
    Quote Originally Posted by June Bug View Post
    Travis Tygart did his job and did it well.
    IMHO I don't believe guilt until proven innocence is doing one's job well

  18. #18
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    1,794
    Quote Originally Posted by WaySlowWhitey View Post
    IMHO I don't believe guilt until proven innocence is doing one's job well
    They have numerous eye witness accounts. They have testimony on how the blood tests were cheated. They have money trails showing where the drugs came from. How is that guilty until proven innocent?

  19. #19
    sock puppet
    Reputation: osokolo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    8,061
    Quote Originally Posted by car_nut View Post
    They have numerous eye witness accounts. They have testimony on how the blood tests were cheated. They have money trails showing where the drugs came from. How is that guilty until proven innocent?
    and most importantly of all - Lance refused the opportunity to defend himself and put this case away for ever. He must have known that he could not have defended himself... 202 pages of summary report by USADA and heavy hitting witnesses - dodge that Lance...

    i hope this report addresses the "witch hunt" aspect of this case and those that refused to believe what was all but obvious, have the info they needed to make an educated opinion.

    at the end - this really is not about Lance - it is about vicious, organized crime in sports - which hopefully will blow up in the worst scandal ever - as the sport needs healing badly and new athletes should have proper guidance and level playing field ahead of them...

    then it may become fun to watch again....

  20. #20
    AZ
    AZ is offline
    banned
    Reputation: AZ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    19,201
    Quote Originally Posted by hh-cc View Post
    The problem is, they've gone after Armstrong but who do they give the titles they strip him of to? At that level during that era there probably weren't too many clean riders and I don't think too many people think there were. They spend all kinds of time and money to go after and bring down Armstrong only to hand his titles to another doper? It would be great if cycling can have 100% cleanliness, but it would be nice if it can get there without eating itself alive.


    "They" don't have to give the title to anyone, just leave it blank or use an * like "they" have done in other instances where the winner has later been disqualified.

  21. #21
    the train keeps rollin
    Reputation: snowdrifter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    3,213
    Quote Originally Posted by osokolo View Post
    then it may become fun to watch again....
    The Vuelta was very entertaining to watch this year.
    beaver hunt

  22. #22
    sock puppet
    Reputation: osokolo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    8,061

    this is not about Armstrong and the past...

    this is about dismantling a sophisticated and almost impossibly to catch, organized scheme of cheating in sports... it is hard to fathom how organized this scheme was...

    this case is about the future of sports, not just cycling...

    justice was slow, but it did come and it is better that it came ever than never... don't really care who gets those titles - could have been you if you were able to ride from start to finish and not take EPO.

    it seems that everyone else in the peloton did...

    Quote Originally Posted by hh-cc View Post

    The problem is, they've gone after Armstrong but who do they give the titles they strip him of to? At that level during that era there probably weren't too many clean riders and I don't think too many people think there were. They spend all kinds of time and money to go after and bring down Armstrong only to hand his titles to another doper? It would be great if cycling can have 100% cleanliness, but it would be nice if it can get there without eating itself alive.

  23. #23
    mtbr member
    Reputation: dirtyjack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    932
    "It took tremendous courage for the riders on the USPS Team and others to come forward and speak truthfully."

    Really? Some of them are already retired. Some of them were already busted. They have nothing to lose. It will be illuminating to see what the punishment is for those still racing.
    SantaCruz Tallboy C
    SantaCruz Solo C
    Specialized Fatboy
    Trek Madone 8
    Kestrel RT 700
    Lemond Zurich

  24. #24
    the train keeps rollin
    Reputation: snowdrifter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    3,213
    Quote Originally Posted by dirtyjack View Post
    It will be illuminating to see what the punishment is for those still racing.
    6mths suspensions, retro active, started Sep 2012 - March 2013, the off season!
    beaver hunt

  25. #25
    sock puppet
    Reputation: osokolo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    8,061
    True - the Giro as well. But TdF just doesn't have that appeal to me anymore, after all this crap.

  26. #26
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    5,322
    Quote Originally Posted by snowdrifter View Post
    6mths suspensions, retro active, started Sep 2012 - March 2013, the off season!
    I know, that's not punishment. If it was Apr 2013 to Sept 2013, I'd be more inclined to believe that as a punishment.
    Lead by my Lefty............... right down the trail, no brakes.

  27. #27
    Mtn View, CA
    Reputation: gddyap's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    437
    Quote Originally Posted by car_nut View Post
    They have numerous eye witness accounts. They have testimony on how the blood tests were cheated. They have money trails showing where the drugs came from. How is that guilty until proven innocent?
    I think he essentially plead no contest which is not the same as pleading guilty. He was not proven guilty since they didn't go forward with arbitration. The end result is the same as a guilty plea, however. And I'm not saying he's innocent by any stretch of the imagination.
    I have come here to chew bubblegum and kick ass... and I'm all out of bubblegum.

  28. #28
    sock puppet
    Reputation: osokolo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    8,061

    Lance had an opportunity

    to either go to arbitration or admit guilt and get better deal. he refused both.

    with the amount of evidence - it is really not necessary for him to admit anything... it is pretty obvious and makes a lot more sense than what he is saying... more over, if he keeps denying it - it will look even worse.

    if i was him, i'd find a suitably big rock and crawl under it for a while... probably grab some anorectic model with me as well... oops, he's done that already...

    Quote Originally Posted by ziscwg View Post
    I know, that's not punishment. If it was Apr 2013 to Sept 2013, I'd be more inclined to believe that as a punishment.

  29. #29
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Stugotz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    427

    Case closed: Armstrong doped

    The word "alleged" should now be dropped from any description of the way doping permeated and enabled Lance Armstrong's cycling career.

    For most of the past 15 years, no discussion or story about Armstrong was complete without that loaded yet qualified term. Doping allegations dogged him, came to naught, were declared specious and dismissed by him. Yet they continued to multiply, rattling behind him like tin cans tied to the bumper of a luxury car.

    The U.S. Anti-Doping Agency's release of its "reasoned decision" and staggeringly voluminous supporting documents that resulted in its move to strip Armstrong of his seven Tour de France titles and ban him from elite competition for life -- charges he opted not to contest -- changes all that, and rewrites Armstrong's sporting epitaph from alleged to proven user of performance-enhancing drugs and techniques.

    There is no other logical conclusion. After today, anyone who remains unconvinced simply doesn't want to know.

    At the core of USADA's case are the collective sworn confessions of a generation of American riders who lived and trained and raced with Armstrong. Taken together, they constitute overwhelming evidence that can't be painted as disgruntled fragging by ex-"lieutenants.'' Tyler Hamilton and Floyd Landis lied about their own doping and tacitly covered for their former teammates for years, which made it difficult for some to believe them when they finally told the truth. Now they no longer stand isolated.

    USADA also presented scientific evidence, in the form of new analyses of old test data, that leads to the conclusion that Armstrong was doping more than a decade ago and continued to dope during his two-season comeback in 2009-10. Had this case gone to arbitration, experts from both sides would have given contradictory accounts of what the numbers mean. Armstrong could have raised questions about USADA's interpretation, or charged that the samples could have been tampered with, as he has before. Instead, with his entire legacy at stake, he elected to walk away.

    You can choose not to believe any or all of the witnesses. You can choose to disregard the flashing neon arrows among the test results. You can somehow construe the $1 million in payments Armstrong made to the Swiss-based company of discredited trainer Michele Ferrari as legitimate medical expenses, or remarkably generous gifts. To discount all three elements of USADA's case, and the way they overlap and intersect, is nothing less than being willfully blind.

    The riders who signed sworn affidavits also either testified before a federal grand jury or were questioned by federal investigators, risking perjury if they lied or changed their stories. And by admitting to old transgressions for which they were never caught, several riders -- notably, the recently retired George Hincapie -- have hung their own reputations out to dry. It defies credulity to say that all of these statements were given out of spite or in bad faith or to reduce the witnesses' own doping penalties.

    The USADA file is greater than the sum of its parts. It shows how sweeping organized doping can be and how many people will collaborate to keep deception afloat when a star's rising tide is lifting them all. Dozens and dozens of people knew: Teammates. Massage therapists. The bus driver. The gardener. Doctors, girlfriends, managers, personal assistants, wives. Everyone cheated. Everyone was in on it. Everyone rationalized that it was part of the cost of doing business.

    Doping was endemic during the era when Armstrong dominated the biggest bike race in the world. Every participant in the sport-wide Ponzi scheme of that time was to some extent the product of a warped environment, including the champion. What sets Armstrong apart is that his competitive success, fueled by illicit means and synergized with his comeback from cancer, made it possible for him to transcend cycling and reap greater profits than anyone else.
    For years, Armstrong's critics depended on deductive reasoning and anonymous sources to peg him as a cheater.

    As Armstrong's contemporaries confessed to doping or were convicted one by one, populating the Tour de France standings below him with cardboard cutouts, it became increasingly difficult to accept that he could have won those races clean -- usually by substantial margins -- over a dirty cohort.

    The USADA file confirms those suspicions, and there are names attached.

    Eleven former teammates' affidavits spell out the same story: a repetitive, mind-numbing, depressing recitation, even for those of us who ditched the rose-tinted lenses long ago. It's also incredibly important to digest this material, for fans of this or any sport -- that is, if you're interested in nonfiction as opposed to gauzy mythology, and if you're curious about the price elite athletes will pay to deliver crowd-pleasing spectacle.

    The file strings together the historical bullet points long worn like beaded bracelets by Armstrong's disbelievers. All the familiar, damning anecdotes are here, recounted over and over by multiple witnesses who were neck-deep in the culture.

    Here is corroboration for the testosterone-laced olive oil and pills and patches and the backdated prescription for cortisone cream produced by the U.S. Postal Service team after a test revealed its presence during Armstrong's first winning Tour. Here are multiple riders describing the use of Actovegin, the extract of calves' blood that Armstrong said he couldn't pronounce and hadn't used; when French authorities asked questions, it was passed off as medication for a team staff member.

    Here are the by-now familiar accounts of refrigerators stocked with vials of erythropoietin and blood bags. Here is the timeline of EPO use shifting to transfusions, shifting to a calculated combination of microdosing both, then morphing again into a horror movie where riders took unthinkable risks with blood stored and delivered and infused in decidedly unsterile conditions. Here are the controlling team director Johan Bruyneel, the skilled but amoral Italian trainer Ferrari, and the Spanish doctors who helped groom riders to accept PEDs, making their use seem practical and inevitable.

    But the most compelling aspects of the riders' testimony have to do with flesh and blood in a different way -- the way their hearts and minds and ambitions were manipulated along with their hematocrit. Christian Vande Velde, ambivalent at best about using the PEDs recommended by Ferrari, was told he better literally get with the program or get off the team. Dave Zabriskie, whose father died because of a drug problem, initially resisted doping and cried alone after the first time he was injected with EPO.

    It's no secret that Armstrong could be an intimidating character. He demonstrated that many times in public, whether it was competing on the road, lashing out at riders who spoke out against doping or recklessly confronting Hamilton in an Aspen, Colo., restaurant after Hamilton's "60 Minutes" appearance last year. But the case file details other chilling examples, old and new, including ominous texts sent to Levi Leipheimer's wife after Leipheimer testified to the federal grand jury.

    None of these riders are heroes for their admissions. They had options, all of them -- to ride without artificial aid; to leave Europe and return to the lower-stakes U.S. circuit; to do something else for a living. Very, very few riders of that era got off the carousel. All of USADA's witnesses benefited at some point, directly or indirectly, from their association with Armstrong and his winning brand.

    Yet while it may be hard to muster sympathy, these accounts finally make it possible for us to have a clear-eyed understanding of the environment at that time and the psyche of the young athletes involved. Everyone in their world conveyed the message that doping was necessary to be "professional'' and that the field was level only if they played dirty. Testing was far more of a crapshoot back then, and Armstrong seemed assured cycling's governing body could be co-opted.

    USADA's case file should forever torpedo the tired and meritless argument that Armstrong is not guilty because he never tested positive. Neither did most of these witnesses, who as a group over time used banned substances and methods on hundreds of occasions. They avoided being busted partly due to luck, partly due to strategic planning by doctors and trainers, and partly due to the warnings they got about testing itself.
    Had Armstrong never made his 2009 racing comeback and stirred the pot -- and had the blackballed Landis not boiled over the following season -- it's a near certainty that the code of silence observed in the peloton would still be intact. These witnesses initially did the right thing only at the point of the federal government's bayonet in 2010. There were some small windows propped open along the way, such as Frankie Andreu's confession of his own doping to The New York Times in 2006, but he and others who made those kinds of admissions did not point their fingers elsewhere. After absorbing the contents of this file, which help explain the forces aligned on Armstrong's side and the risks of personally challenging him, it's easy to understand why.

    It's harder to wrestle with what should come of all of this. What penalty, what punishment, really is appropriate for Armstrong or anyone else in the conspiracy and cover-up who hasn't yet admitted responsibility? Can this much collateral damage ever be repaired or made right?

    Odds are Armstrong ultimately will be stripped of his Tour de France titles, but the extent of doping in that era renders moot who would inherit them. Forfeiting prize money and results? A pittance compared to the millions Armstrong made off the road, which he is under no obligation to return. Inability to compete in elite sports? Armstrong will always find a place to race and people who want to race with him, or at least come to watch. He is stubborn enough to be capable of existing indefinitely in a sort of parallel universe where he is still who he purported to be -- a purveyor of hope on wheels.

    And there will always be people who loved those three-week travelogues every July and don't want to give up on their longtime protagonist, either. Sunflowers and lavender and Alpine switchbacks are far more appealing images than syringes and blood bags and a cult of personality channeled into coercion. Armstrong's legacy lies now not only in the eye of the beholder but in the willingness of that beholder to take off the blinders and see.

    Original article here.
    Speed Kills...It kills those that don't have it!
    German Engineering in Da Haus, Ja!

  30. #30
    the train keeps rollin
    Reputation: snowdrifter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    3,213
    It all started and ends with Lance, Yep case closed. Our kids won't dope now, and we can go back to watching road racing.
    beaver hunt

  31. #31
    sock puppet
    Reputation: osokolo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    8,061

    for a second i thought you came up with this

    but then realized naah...



    very good article... can't wait to read the 202 pages summary... apparently emails are more fun to read than some "eating garbage before the ride" thread...



    Quote Originally Posted by Stugotz View Post
    The word "alleged" should now be dropped from any description of the way doping permeated and enabled Lance Armstrong's cycling career.

    For most of the past 15 years, no discussion or story about Armstrong was complete without that loaded yet qualified term. Doping allegations dogged him, came to naught, were declared specious and dismissed by him. Yet they continued to multiply, rattling behind him like tin cans tied to the bumper of a luxury car.

    The U.S. Anti-Doping Agency's release of its "reasoned decision" and staggeringly voluminous supporting documents that resulted in its move to strip Armstrong of his seven Tour de France titles and ban him from elite competition for life -- charges he opted not to contest -- changes all that, and rewrites Armstrong's sporting epitaph from alleged to proven user of performance-enhancing drugs and techniques.

    There is no other logical conclusion. After today, anyone who remains unconvinced simply doesn't want to know.

    At the core of USADA's case are the collective sworn confessions of a generation of American riders who lived and trained and raced with Armstrong. Taken together, they constitute overwhelming evidence that can't be painted as disgruntled fragging by ex-"lieutenants.'' Tyler Hamilton and Floyd Landis lied about their own doping and tacitly covered for their former teammates for years, which made it difficult for some to believe them when they finally told the truth. Now they no longer stand isolated.

    USADA also presented scientific evidence, in the form of new analyses of old test data, that leads to the conclusion that Armstrong was doping more than a decade ago and continued to dope during his two-season comeback in 2009-10. Had this case gone to arbitration, experts from both sides would have given contradictory accounts of what the numbers mean. Armstrong could have raised questions about USADA's interpretation, or charged that the samples could have been tampered with, as he has before. Instead, with his entire legacy at stake, he elected to walk away.

    You can choose not to believe any or all of the witnesses. You can choose to disregard the flashing neon arrows among the test results. You can somehow construe the $1 million in payments Armstrong made to the Swiss-based company of discredited trainer Michele Ferrari as legitimate medical expenses, or remarkably generous gifts. To discount all three elements of USADA's case, and the way they overlap and intersect, is nothing less than being willfully blind.

    The riders who signed sworn affidavits also either testified before a federal grand jury or were questioned by federal investigators, risking perjury if they lied or changed their stories. And by admitting to old transgressions for which they were never caught, several riders -- notably, the recently retired George Hincapie -- have hung their own reputations out to dry. It defies credulity to say that all of these statements were given out of spite or in bad faith or to reduce the witnesses' own doping penalties.

    The USADA file is greater than the sum of its parts. It shows how sweeping organized doping can be and how many people will collaborate to keep deception afloat when a star's rising tide is lifting them all. Dozens and dozens of people knew: Teammates. Massage therapists. The bus driver. The gardener. Doctors, girlfriends, managers, personal assistants, wives. Everyone cheated. Everyone was in on it. Everyone rationalized that it was part of the cost of doing business.

    Doping was endemic during the era when Armstrong dominated the biggest bike race in the world. Every participant in the sport-wide Ponzi scheme of that time was to some extent the product of a warped environment, including the champion. What sets Armstrong apart is that his competitive success, fueled by illicit means and synergized with his comeback from cancer, made it possible for him to transcend cycling and reap greater profits than anyone else.
    For years, Armstrong's critics depended on deductive reasoning and anonymous sources to peg him as a cheater.

    As Armstrong's contemporaries confessed to doping or were convicted one by one, populating the Tour de France standings below him with cardboard cutouts, it became increasingly difficult to accept that he could have won those races clean -- usually by substantial margins -- over a dirty cohort.

    The USADA file confirms those suspicions, and there are names attached.

    Eleven former teammates' affidavits spell out the same story: a repetitive, mind-numbing, depressing recitation, even for those of us who ditched the rose-tinted lenses long ago. It's also incredibly important to digest this material, for fans of this or any sport -- that is, if you're interested in nonfiction as opposed to gauzy mythology, and if you're curious about the price elite athletes will pay to deliver crowd-pleasing spectacle.

    The file strings together the historical bullet points long worn like beaded bracelets by Armstrong's disbelievers. All the familiar, damning anecdotes are here, recounted over and over by multiple witnesses who were neck-deep in the culture.

    Here is corroboration for the testosterone-laced olive oil and pills and patches and the backdated prescription for cortisone cream produced by the U.S. Postal Service team after a test revealed its presence during Armstrong's first winning Tour. Here are multiple riders describing the use of Actovegin, the extract of calves' blood that Armstrong said he couldn't pronounce and hadn't used; when French authorities asked questions, it was passed off as medication for a team staff member.

    Here are the by-now familiar accounts of refrigerators stocked with vials of erythropoietin and blood bags. Here is the timeline of EPO use shifting to transfusions, shifting to a calculated combination of microdosing both, then morphing again into a horror movie where riders took unthinkable risks with blood stored and delivered and infused in decidedly unsterile conditions. Here are the controlling team director Johan Bruyneel, the skilled but amoral Italian trainer Ferrari, and the Spanish doctors who helped groom riders to accept PEDs, making their use seem practical and inevitable.

    But the most compelling aspects of the riders' testimony have to do with flesh and blood in a different way -- the way their hearts and minds and ambitions were manipulated along with their hematocrit. Christian Vande Velde, ambivalent at best about using the PEDs recommended by Ferrari, was told he better literally get with the program or get off the team. Dave Zabriskie, whose father died because of a drug problem, initially resisted doping and cried alone after the first time he was injected with EPO.

    It's no secret that Armstrong could be an intimidating character. He demonstrated that many times in public, whether it was competing on the road, lashing out at riders who spoke out against doping or recklessly confronting Hamilton in an Aspen, Colo., restaurant after Hamilton's "60 Minutes" appearance last year. But the case file details other chilling examples, old and new, including ominous texts sent to Levi Leipheimer's wife after Leipheimer testified to the federal grand jury.

    None of these riders are heroes for their admissions. They had options, all of them -- to ride without artificial aid; to leave Europe and return to the lower-stakes U.S. circuit; to do something else for a living. Very, very few riders of that era got off the carousel. All of USADA's witnesses benefited at some point, directly or indirectly, from their association with Armstrong and his winning brand.

    Yet while it may be hard to muster sympathy, these accounts finally make it possible for us to have a clear-eyed understanding of the environment at that time and the psyche of the young athletes involved. Everyone in their world conveyed the message that doping was necessary to be "professional'' and that the field was level only if they played dirty. Testing was far more of a crapshoot back then, and Armstrong seemed assured cycling's governing body could be co-opted.

    USADA's case file should forever torpedo the tired and meritless argument that Armstrong is not guilty because he never tested positive. Neither did most of these witnesses, who as a group over time used banned substances and methods on hundreds of occasions. They avoided being busted partly due to luck, partly due to strategic planning by doctors and trainers, and partly due to the warnings they got about testing itself.
    Had Armstrong never made his 2009 racing comeback and stirred the pot -- and had the blackballed Landis not boiled over the following season -- it's a near certainty that the code of silence observed in the peloton would still be intact. These witnesses initially did the right thing only at the point of the federal government's bayonet in 2010. There were some small windows propped open along the way, such as Frankie Andreu's confession of his own doping to The New York Times in 2006, but he and others who made those kinds of admissions did not point their fingers elsewhere. After absorbing the contents of this file, which help explain the forces aligned on Armstrong's side and the risks of personally challenging him, it's easy to understand why.

    It's harder to wrestle with what should come of all of this. What penalty, what punishment, really is appropriate for Armstrong or anyone else in the conspiracy and cover-up who hasn't yet admitted responsibility? Can this much collateral damage ever be repaired or made right?

    Odds are Armstrong ultimately will be stripped of his Tour de France titles, but the extent of doping in that era renders moot who would inherit them. Forfeiting prize money and results? A pittance compared to the millions Armstrong made off the road, which he is under no obligation to return. Inability to compete in elite sports? Armstrong will always find a place to race and people who want to race with him, or at least come to watch. He is stubborn enough to be capable of existing indefinitely in a sort of parallel universe where he is still who he purported to be -- a purveyor of hope on wheels.

    And there will always be people who loved those three-week travelogues every July and don't want to give up on their longtime protagonist, either. Sunflowers and lavender and Alpine switchbacks are far more appealing images than syringes and blood bags and a cult of personality channeled into coercion. Armstrong's legacy lies now not only in the eye of the beholder but in the willingness of that beholder to take off the blinders and see.

    Original article here.

  32. #32
    mtbr member
    Reputation: dirtyjack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    932
    Quote Originally Posted by snowdrifter View Post
    6mths suspensions, retro active, started Sep 2012 - March 2013, the off season!
    I hadn't seen that. Well, I rest my case. A slap on the wrist if you help us tear down Lance. My biggest beef is that they will hand all his wins to the second place doper. And the cat & mouse game of doping goes on....
    SantaCruz Tallboy C
    SantaCruz Solo C
    Specialized Fatboy
    Trek Madone 8
    Kestrel RT 700
    Lemond Zurich

  33. #33
    No. Just No.
    Reputation: Circlip's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    5,150
    Quote Originally Posted by dirtyjack View Post
    My biggest beef is that they will hand all his wins to the second place doper.
    Unlikely outcome. Probably a blank space or asterisk to be shown in historical results.

  34. #34
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    4,152
    So what happens to the scammer organization he runs? I guess he's still laughing all the way to bank with the three cups of tea scammer!

  35. #35
    No. Just No.
    Reputation: Circlip's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    5,150
    Quote Originally Posted by SS Hack View Post
    So what happens to the scammer organization he runs? I guess he's still laughing all the way to bank with the three cups of tea scammer!
    Much as I think the book should be thrown at Armstrong and others, I wouldn't go so far as to call the Lance Armstrong Foundation (commonly known as Livestrong) a scam. They do raise a lot of money for cancer-related programs for survivors and awareness, although it should be noted that it stopped funding cancer research some years ago.

    The organization itself would hopefully do better if it would cease any activities related to trying to prop up the failing image of their figurehead (paid Livestrong lobbyists in WA trying to stop USADA funding, etc.) and concentrate instead on the activities that have real value independent of the man.

    As a sidenote, one does have to question the use of the livestrong.com web site by Armstrong and his business associates for commercial profit activities that have nothing to do with the foundation, and only serves to siphon traffic away from the livestrong.org web site that is the actual foundation. They could have run the same activities under any other domain name, but I guess then they wouldn't be leveraging off the branding of a charitable foundation then, would they? That's really inappropriate, profiteering off of what should be a good cause.

    Sounds weird to say it, but Lance Armstrong should just leave the Lance Armstrong Foundation alone and distance himself from it as much as possible, if he really cared about it.

  36. #36
    mtbr member
    Reputation: 53119's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    3,287
    should've used one of those stupid yellow wristbands and snapped one off in his eye to snap into reality, clarity, and the gravity of what was happening. ego is a *****.

  37. #37
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    4,152
    Quote Originally Posted by 53119 View Post
    should've used one of those stupid yellow wristbands and snapped one off in his eye to snap into reality, clarity, and the gravity of what was happening. ego is a *****.
    I wonder if everyone that ever wore one of those ugly things feels cheated?

  38. #38
    Fuji1971
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    77
    Who believes this will prevent future doping in Pro Cycling?

  39. #39
    No. Just No.
    Reputation: Circlip's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    5,150
    Quote Originally Posted by fuji1971 View Post
    Who believes this will prevent future doping in Pro Cycling?
    It will sure help it to be cleaner. Pro cycling is almost certainly never going to be 100% clean though.

  40. #40
    zrm
    zrm is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    5,557
    Quote Originally Posted by AZ.MTNS View Post
    "They" don't have to give the title to anyone, just leave it blank or use an * like "they" have done in other instances where the winner has later been disqualified.
    Do you really think that will happen?

  41. #41
    No. Just No.
    Reputation: Circlip's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    5,150
    Quote Originally Posted by zrm View Post
    Do you really think that will happen?
    Not AZ here, but I really don't know. Out of all the possible options I'd rank them as follows, but this is just a wild guess;

    1. asterisk
    2. blank line
    3. leave unchanged (while still otherwise upholding sanction)
    4. award to other riders

  42. #42
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    1,794
    Quote Originally Posted by fuji1971 View Post
    Who believes this will prevent future doping in Pro Cycling?
    I do. As long as he wasn't caught, he was a testament to the idea that you could win and get away with it. Now, people will say "they chased him down a decade after the fact!"

    I certainly don't think it will make the sport entirely free, but it will help reinforce the idea that it may catch up with you. If nothing else, hopefully it suppresses it to the point that only individuals partake in it. If the whole team is doing it under the direction of the team boss and physician, that makes it impossible to not dope.

  43. #43
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    4,152
    Quote Originally Posted by car_nut View Post
    I do. As long as he wasn't caught, he was a testament to the idea that you could win and get away with it. Now, people will say "they chased him down a decade after the fact!"

    I certainly don't think it will make the sport entirely free, but it will help reinforce the idea that it may catch up with you. If nothing else, hopefully it suppresses it to the point that only individuals partake in it. If the whole team is doing it under the direction of the team boss and physician, that makes it impossible to not dope.
    Maybe he needs hard time in prison? That would send a message.

  44. #44
    No. Just No.
    Reputation: Circlip's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    5,150
    Quote Originally Posted by car_nut View Post
    I do. As long as he wasn't caught, he was a testament to the idea that you could win and get away with it. Now, people will say "they chased him down a decade after the fact!"

    I certainly don't think it will make the sport entirely free, but it will help reinforce the idea that it may catch up with you. If nothing else, hopefully it suppresses it to the point that only individuals partake in it. If the whole team is doing it under the direction of the team boss and physician, that makes it impossible to not dope.
    ^^^
    Gets it.

  45. #45
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    148
    Quote Originally Posted by roadie scum View Post
    The pursuit of justice should not be likened to beating a dead horse.
    Uh....yeah it should....

  46. #46
    sock puppet
    Reputation: osokolo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    8,061

    well said

    that is just the beginning...


    Quote Originally Posted by car_nut View Post
    I do. As long as he wasn't caught, he was a testament to the idea that you could win and get away with it. Now, people will say "they chased him down a decade after the fact!"

    I certainly don't think it will make the sport entirely free, but it will help reinforce the idea that it may catch up with you. If nothing else, hopefully it suppresses it to the point that only individuals partake in it. If the whole team is doing it under the direction of the team boss and physician, that makes it impossible to not dope.

  47. #47
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Vespasianus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    4,715
    Quote Originally Posted by car_nut View Post
    I do. As long as he wasn't caught, he was a testament to the idea that you could win and get away with it. Now, people will say "they chased him down a decade after the fact!"

    I certainly don't think it will make the sport entirely free, but it will help reinforce the idea that it may catch up with you. If nothing else, hopefully it suppresses it to the point that only individuals partake in it. If the whole team is doing it under the direction of the team boss and physician, that makes it impossible to not dope.
    But I also think Armstrong's downfall was that he was a bully and a jerk. People were just looking for one person to stand up to him and once the USDA did, the walls came down. Eventually, being a prick comes back to bite you.

    Wiggins has been an outspoken proponent of clean cycling for years. His win will do more for the sport than anything. If people think he won clean, they will believe they can as well.

  48. #48
    banned
    Reputation: roadie scum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    773
    Quote Originally Posted by Circlip View Post
    .

    As a sidenote, one does have to question the use of the livestrong.com web site by Armstrong and his business associates for commercial profit activities that have nothing to do with the foundation, .




    How else would he pay for all that jet fuel? Flying in a private jet was one way he avoided being discovered, he avoided much of the airport security by flying in his own jet. Livestrong funds bought a lot of jet fuel for international flights to aid his doping conspiracy. Hopefully all the new attention on Lance will revive his Federal case which was not prosecuted because of political pressure. The house of cards is collapsing.

  49. #49
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    200
    Quote Originally Posted by zrm View Post
    Do you really think that will happen?
    Well Tour De France director Christian Prudhomme does.

    Tour de France head wants no rider to inherit Lance Armstrong's titles | Sport | guardian.co.uk

  50. #50
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    200
    Quote Originally Posted by Circlip View Post
    Much as I think the book should be thrown at Armstrong and others, I wouldn't go so far as to call the Lance Armstrong Foundation (commonly known as Livestrong) a scam. They do raise a lot of money for cancer-related programs for survivors and awareness, although it should be noted that it stopped funding cancer research some years ago.

    The organization itself would hopefully do better if it would cease any activities related to trying to prop up the failing image of their figurehead (paid Livestrong lobbyists in WA trying to stop USADA funding, etc.) and concentrate instead on the activities that have real value independent of the man.

    As a sidenote, one does have to question the use of the livestrong.com web site by Armstrong and his business associates for commercial profit activities that have nothing to do with the foundation, and only serves to siphon traffic away from the livestrong.org web site that is the actual foundation. They could have run the same activities under any other domain name, but I guess then they wouldn't be leveraging off the branding of a charitable foundation then, would they? That's really inappropriate, profiteering off of what should be a good cause.

    Sounds weird to say it, but Lance Armstrong should just leave the Lance Armstrong Foundation alone and distance himself from it as much as possible, if he really cared about it.
    There are 2 websites...Livestrong.org (the Lance Armstrong Foundation) and Livestrong.com, a for-profit website. Not intentionally confusing at all.

  51. #51
    mtbr member
    Reputation: beerrun's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    139
    I read a good deal of the Reasoned Decision. Circumstantial and direct evidence, affidavits, corroborating testimony as well.
    Not to push buttons, but there are a lot of ******s in pro-anything. Hyper-competitive, type-A ******s.
    The reason LA is going down is because he's DENIED everything for years, BULLIED his peers, staff, and others, and CAJOLED the public into believing his achievements were won pure and clean.
    BAH!
    If he were a friend of yours, or a co-worker, or your child, wouldn't you be ashamed?
    Notwithstanding the cancer foundation's work, I will vehemently contradict any single person who continues to hold LA on a pedestal.
    WHAT A ******!

  52. #52
    dru
    dru is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    2,444
    Yes, reading that 'decision' was really a must for me.

    I've read almost all of it in a few big chunks. It is quite a depressing document. The nastiness of Armstrong and the awful witnessing of people selling their souls for 'the team', and themselves obviously, really came through loud and clear.

    I remain amazed that so many people all around the world will attempt to deny Armstrong's guilt, despite the mountain of evidence within the 202 page paper.

    Drew
    occasional cyclist

  53. #53
    sock puppet
    Reputation: osokolo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    8,061
    sadly true...

  54. #54
    YOUREGO ISNOT YOURAMIGO
    Reputation: GoGoGordo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    2,799
    Quote Originally Posted by Stugotz View Post
    Statement From USADA CEO Travis T. Tygart Regarding The U.S. Postal Service Pro Cycling Team Doping Conspiracy

    October 10, 2012

    Today, we are sending the ‘Reasoned Decision’ in the Lance Armstrong case and supporting information to the Union Cycliste International (UCI), the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA), and the World Triathlon Corporation (WTC). The evidence shows beyond any doubt that the US Postal Service Pro Cycling Team ran the most sophisticated, professionalized and successful doping program that sport has ever seen.

    The evidence of the US Postal Service Pro Cycling Team-run scheme is overwhelming and is in excess of 1000 pages, and includes sworn testimony from 26 people, including 15 riders with knowledge of the US Postal Service Team (USPS Team) and its participants’ doping activities. The evidence also includes direct documentary evidence including financial payments, emails, scientific data and laboratory test results that further prove the use, possession and distribution of performance enhancing drugs by Lance Armstrong and confirm the disappointing truth about the deceptive activities of the USPS Team, a team that received tens of millions of American taxpayer dollars in funding.

    Together these different categories of eyewitness, documentary, first-hand, scientific, direct and circumstantial evidence reveal conclusive and undeniable proof that brings to the light of day for the first time this systemic, sustained and highly professionalized team-run doping conspiracy. All of the material will be made available later this afternoon on the USADA website at U.S. Anti-Doping Agency - USADA.

    The USPS Team doping conspiracy was professionally designed to groom and pressure athletes to use dangerous drugs, to evade detection, to ensure its secrecy and ultimately gain an unfair competitive advantage through superior doping practices. A program organized by individuals who thought they were above the rules and who still play a major and active role in sport today.

    The evidence demonstrates that the ‘Code of Silence’ of performance enhancing drug use in the sport of cycling has been shattered, but there is more to do. From day one, we always hoped this investigation would bring to a close this troubling chapter in cycling’s history and we hope the sport will use this tragedy to prevent it from ever happening again.

    Of course, no one wants to be chained to the past forever, and I would call on the UCI to act on its own recent suggestion for a meaningful Truth and Reconciliation program. While we appreciate the arguments that weigh in favor of and against such a program, we believe that allowing individuals like the riders mentioned today to come forward and acknowledge the truth about their past doping may be the only way to truly dismantle the remaining system that allowed this “EPO and Blood Doping Era” to flourish. Hopefully, the sport can unshackle itself from the past, and once and for all continue to move forward to a better future.

    Our mission is to protect clean athletes by preserving the integrity of competition not only for today’s athletes but also the athletes of tomorrow. We have heard from many athletes who have faced an unfair dilemma — dope, or don’t compete at the highest levels of the sport. Many of them abandoned their dreams and left sport because they refused to endanger their health and participate in doping. That is a tragic choice no athlete should have to make.

    It took tremendous courage for the riders on the USPS Team and others to come forward and speak truthfully. It is not easy to admit your mistakes and accept your punishment. But that is what these riders have done for the good of the sport, and for the young riders who hope to one day reach their dreams without using dangerous drugs or methods.

    These eleven (11) teammates of Lance Armstrong, in alphabetical order, are Frankie Andreu, Michael Barry, Tom Danielson, Tyler Hamilton, George Hincapie, Floyd Landis, Levi Leipheimer, Stephen Swart, Christian Vande Velde, Jonathan Vaughters and David Zabriskie.

    The riders who participated in the USPS Team doping conspiracy and truthfully assisted have been courageous in making the choice to stop perpetuating the sporting fraud, and they have suffered greatly. In addition to the public revelations, the active riders have been suspended and disqualified appropriately in line with the rules. In some part, it would have been easier for them if it all would just go away; however, they love the sport, and they want to help young athletes have hope that they are not put in the position they were -- to face the reality that in order to climb to the heights of their sport they had to sink to the depths of dangerous cheating.

    I have personally talked with and heard these athletes’ stories and firmly believe that, collectively, these athletes, if forgiven and embraced, have a chance to leave a legacy far greater for the good of the sport than anything they ever did on a bike.

    Lance Armstrong was given the same opportunity to come forward and be part of the solution. He rejected it.

    Instead he exercised his legal right not to contest the evidence and knowingly accepted the imposition of a ban from recognized competition for life and disqualification of his competitive results from 1998 forward. The entire factual and legal basis on the outcome in his case and the other six active riders’ cases will be provided in the materials made available online later today. Two other members of the USPS Team, Dr. Michele Ferrari and Dr. Garcia del Moral, also received lifetime bans for perpetrating this doping conspiracy.

    Three other members of the USPS Team have chosen to contest the charges and take their cases to arbitration: Johan Bruyneel, the team director; Dr. Pedro Celaya, a team doctor; and Jose “Pepe” Marti, the team trainer. These three individuals will receive a full hearing before independent judges, where they will have the opportunity to present and confront the evidence, cross-examine witnesses and testify under oath in a public proceeding.

    From day one in this case, as in every potential case, the USADA Board of Directors and professional staff did the job we are mandated to do for clean athletes and the integrity of sport. We focused solely on finding the truth without being influenced by celebrity or non-celebrity, threats, personal attacks or political pressure because that is what clean athletes deserve and demand.”


    CONTACT:
    USADA Media Relations
    Phone: (719) 785-2000
    E-mail: media@usada.org

    Link to the original article here.
    Meh.
    Banned for showing Boobies.

  55. #55
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    4,152
    Quote Originally Posted by dru View Post
    Yes, reading that 'decision' was really a must for me.

    I've read almost all of it in a few big chunks. It is quite a depressing document. The nastiness of Armstrong and the awful witnessing of people selling their souls for 'the team', and themselves obviously, really came through loud and clear.

    I remain amazed that so many people all around the world will attempt to deny Armstrong's guilt, despite the mountain of evidence within the 202 page paper.

    Drew
    You remember OJ, right?

  56. #56
    sock puppet
    Reputation: osokolo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    8,061

    the ex football player who

    killed his wife?

    what about him?

    Quote Originally Posted by SS Hack View Post
    You remember OJ, right?

  57. #57
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Blurr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    2,335
    Quote Originally Posted by car_nut View Post
    They have numerous eye witness accounts. They have testimony on how the blood tests were cheated. They have money trails showing where the drugs came from. How is that guilty until proven innocent?
    75 percent of eyewitness conviction is overturned via DNA, the USADA knows it is unreliable but will use it to paint a picture of lance, there case is so ridiculous all they can do is try to make Lance into an Evil Villain to make sure people look past how shady their evidence actually is, and merely hate him as a human being so they do not care, and in their mind, believe the crap put forth.
    Is eyewitness testimony too unreliable to trust? - The Week

    The Problem With Eyewitness Testimony

    Eyewitness Testimony Doesn't Make It True--A Commentary by Steven B. Duke | Yale Law School

    Now if we take into account the only way they got the testimony was basically to blackmail the athletes with the "tell us what we want and we will not destroy your life".


    The Blood tests have not proven a thing, only the continued subjective behavior of the USADA, furthermore in order to strip Lance of every title they should also have to prove that he cheated in Every Single one of those Events, that would be impossible to do.
    SHam organization and I am shocked at how many people fall for it at all, I thought civilization had moved forward from Witch hunts, that never will happen evidently.

  58. #58
    dru
    dru is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    2,444
    Quote Originally Posted by Blurr View Post
    75 percent of eyewitness conviction is overturned via DNA, the USADA knows it is unreliable but will use it to paint a picture of lance, there case is so ridiculous all they can do is try to make Lance into an Evil Villain to make sure people look past how shady their evidence actually is, and merely hate him as a human being so they do not care, and in their mind, believe the crap put forth.
    How do you explain the Activegin?
    How do you explain Armstrong's lying about Ferrari?
    Specifically that he severed ties in 2004?
    How do you explain the $400,000 Armstrong paid Ferrari the next two years?
    Remember, Armstrong lied about this under oath.
    Why would he lie?

    Now if we take into account the only way they got the testimony was basically to blackmail the athletes with the "tell us what we want and we will not destroy your life".
    But it's OK with you that Armstrong sets out to destroy anyone that tells the truth, or even attempts to.


    The Blood tests have not proven a thing, only the continued subjective behavior of the USADA, furthermore in order to strip Lance of every title they should also have to prove that he cheated in Every Single one of those Events, that would be impossible to do.
    SHam organization and I am shocked at how many people fall for it at all, I thought civilization had moved forward from Witch hunts, that never will happen evidently.
    Of course it's all some kind of grand conspiracy against the ony guy who's clean (your obvious bias) fueled by 'evil big government', and all those other riders who were doping (or were they clean too- in your mind) somehow lost 7 tours to his drug free awesomeness......


    You know, if it walks like a duck........

    Drew
    occasional cyclist

  59. #59
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    897
    Quote Originally Posted by dru View Post
    You know, if it walks like a duck........
    Drew
    Yes this is why I assume there is a 90% chance that any cyclist in the top 100 of the TdF is cheating. I would actually assume that about even more of them honestly (yes that includes Wiggins I assume he is cheating, but I don't really care). The nature of a sport like road cycling makes this inevitable. It is so incredibly reliant upon endurance far and above all else that this is the natural outcome. Other sports that require more than spinning the legs in perpetuity allow for skill to matter a bit more and thus doping to be less important and essential.

  60. #60
    mtbr member
    Reputation: June Bug's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    1,694

    "Lance Armstrong case creates an unlikely hero"

    Quote Originally Posted by sxotty View Post
    Yes this is why I assume there is a 90% chance that any cyclist in the top 100 of the TdF is cheating. ....so incredibly reliant upon endurance far and above all else that this is the natural outcome.
    It was probably close to 100% back in the day.

    For those who have read Hamilton's Secret Race, Scott Mercier was referenced as the one guy who decided to walk away from a pro cycling career rather than use PEDs.

    BBC Sport has written a great article about Mercier (full text here), but I thought one of the most telling aspects of the article was his description of trying to train & race clean and just not being able to keep up. Hamilton recounts a similar scenario of training clean, and not being able to maintain against riders who were already doping. Pure grit, genetic gifts, determination, talent did not have a chance against the advantage provided by EPO and other PEDs.

    Mercier had tried doing the training programme without using drugs, but found it impossible. "I could do the first two days, but by about the fifth hour on the third day I couldn't do the efforts, I was getting fatigue and had to take a recovery day."

    "You get frustrated when your peers are beating your head into the gutter," he says, the frustration still in his voice. "When you're at an Amstel Gold Race and you can barely hold the wheel of the guy in 80th place.

    "That same guy, you smoked three months previously. And you're thinking 'I've been training. I've lost two, three kilos. How is this guy suddenly so much better than me?'"

    He remembers asking Hincapie, his team-mate, friend and flat-mate, about doping over a coffee in Girona, Spain, one day in March 1997.

    "He didn't give me a yes or a no, he just said 'you'll have to make your own decision'. I took that to mean that yes, there is a fair amount and if you want to be a pro you'll have to do it."

    .... Mercier now thinks there should be an anonymous telephone number that whistleblowers can call to report their suspicions of doping, and that sanctions should be strengthened so that teams as well as individual riders can be banned.

    He also believes the current leadership of the UCI must be replaced because they are "part of the problem, not the solution".

    Above all, he hopes no rider ever again has to leave the sport they love because they want to ride clean.


    Mercier now lives in Grand Junction, CO
    Last edited by June Bug; 10-14-2012 at 06:25 AM.

  61. #61
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Blurr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    2,335
    Quote Originally Posted by dru View Post
    How do you explain the Activegin?
    How do you explain Armstrong's lying about Ferrari?
    Specifically that he severed ties in 2004?
    How do you explain the $400,000 Armstrong paid Ferrari the next two years?
    Remember, Armstrong lied about this under oath.
    Why would he lie?
    Wait, so you support the USADA who is weaving a subjective story (most often lies please read my above links) yet would dare criticize lance for trying to save his career against an organization he knows he cannot win against? Seriously?

    But it's OK with you that Armstrong sets out to destroy anyone that tells the truth, or even attempts to.
    What is the truth? Oh wait thats right the way the USADA is going about this we can never know, thus my point. Was it ok for hte USADA to walk around threatening anyone that has anything to do with Lance to get the story they want?
    That is why there is testing, either it works or it doesnt, if i doesnt then it needs to be done away with, thus far the only thing Lance apparently is guilty of is having success and maybe being a prick.



    Of course it's all some kind of grand conspiracy against the ony guy who's clean (your obvious bias) fueled by 'evil big government', and all those other riders who were doping (or were they clean too- in your mind) somehow lost 7 tours to his drug free awesomeness......
    I rarely watch sports or TV, professional athletes are over paid Cry babies IMO, however I do pay attention to what the government does and how they do it, that much I care about.
    First off I care that all this was decided OUTSIDE of he court of law, and There was way, way to much money dumped into this investigation to come up with subjective BS meanwhile you have va congress which does insider trading, Fast and Furious, 911 commission which was a joke, and tens of thousands of missing persons each year, yet a ****ing sports figure is worthy of all this money for what again? GTFO

    You know, if it walks like a duck........

    Drew
    Yea I know but I bet you will vote for the same Lying politician as before, that doesnt matter so much to you though does it

  62. #62
    dru
    dru is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    2,444
    Blurr, please answer the questions I posted about Ferrari, and the Actevegin. That stuff isn't subjective is it?

    The questions I posted are from press releases, financial statements, and court testimony long before the USADA's investigation began.

    How do you explain this? No B.S. please, just answer the questions.

    As for eye witness stuff your links are a little off topic and a bit of misdirection. A witness saying, for instance " I saw some guy in a red hoodie shot that guy" isn't really the same as a whole bunch of people who doped saying "I doped', he doped, we all doped, Armstrong doped', numerous times, and of course all the timelines and testimonoy matches.

    The USADA can go around threatening sports cheats all they want. The witnesses are cheats, and the USADA's job is to punish them and expose the cheaters.

    911 Commission.....OMG you're not a 'truther' are you????

    ROTFLMAO....that explains everything
    occasional cyclist

  63. #63
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Blurr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    2,335
    Quote Originally Posted by dru View Post
    Blurr, please answer the questions I posted about Ferrari, and the Actevegin. That stuff isn't subjective is it?

    The questions I posted are from press releases, financial statements, and court testimony long before the USADA's investigation began.

    How do you explain this? No B.S. please, just answer the questions.
    Oh so before the investigation lance was proven guilty in the court of law of doping?
    You do know that Lance only has one nut and already takes a legal dose of testosterone, Im sure as would anyone you would hire the best to make sure you stayed within the legal limit, or maybe not, but if he did not, the the testing should have caught it, if it didnt, then again, there is a problem with your testing then it aught to be changed.

    As for eye witness stuff your links are a little off topic and a bit of misdirection. A witness saying, for instance " I saw some guy in a red hoodie shot that guy" isn't really the same as a whole bunch of people who doped saying "I doped', he doped, we all doped, Armstrong doped', numerous times, and of course all the timelines and testimonoy matches.
    Of course their timeline matches they all competed together again, read the links fully.


    .
    The USADA can go around threatening sports cheats all they want. The witnesses are cheats, and the USADA's job is to punish them and expose the cheaters.
    this is why we have the court of law to prevent this kind of subjecive ******** which was prevailent before the foundation of this country, you are ok with organizations walking around finger pointing at will just so you feel good?
    911 Commission.....OMG you're not a 'truther' are you????

    ROTFLMAO....that explains everything
    Arnt you? I mean you keep talking about how you want the truth, but then in reality, you dont care so much about the truth do you?

  64. #64
    dru
    dru is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    2,444
    You still haven't addressed my questions about Ferrari, or the Activegin. The audience is waiting, as am I.

    The Ferrari stuff proves Armstrong is a LIAR.
    There is nothing subjective about that.
    Why did he lie?
    If he thought Ferrari was above reproach, why hide his business relationship?

    What about the Actevegin?

    Still waiting.....

    Don't you think it's odd that Armstrong would have an extensive business/personal relationship with a guy who's been on record advocating drug use, such as EPO?

    If Armstrong's supposed to be clean, why is he hanging with drug pushers.

    I did read your links. Are you really that much of a conspiracy theorist to think all the testimony from all te sources over so many years was fabricated? Your links, like I said earlier, don't really apply here.

    If I recall correctly the judge that turned down Armstrong's last legal action stated that the USADA's methodology and arbitration was sufficient.

    Your legal opinion is obviously superior....

    Of course I care about the truth. I don't understand unjustified hero worship of scumbags, that's all.

    As for 911, it was a terrible thing, but Occam's razor fits the bill. The truth of nutjob Arabs deciding to fly planes into the towers is the simpliest and most likely explaination.

    Drew
    occasional cyclist

  65. #65
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Blurr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    2,335
    Quote Originally Posted by dru View Post
    You still haven't addressed my questions about Ferrari, or the Activegin. The audience is waiting, as am I.

    The Ferrari stuff proves Armstrong is a LIAR.
    There is nothing subjective about that.
    Why did he lie?
    If he thought Ferrari was above reproach, why hide his business relationship?

    What about the Actevegin?

    Still waiting.....

    Don't you think it's odd that Armstrong would have an extensive business/personal relationship with a guy who's been on record advocating drug use, such as EPO?

    If Armstrong's supposed to be clean, why is he hanging with drug pushers.
    see above I already answered.

    I did read your links. Are you really that much of a conspiracy theorist to think all the testimony from all te sources over so many years was fabricated? Your links, like I said earlier, don't really apply here.
    . You never read the links or you would understand why eye whitness testimony is unreliable, so I will explain it to you. One in relation to this investigation you have people claiming to see something merely to save their own skin.
    Two people often think they see something and they never did
    three if you tell people something enough they will themselves think they were part of it. THere are people who were found innocent of a crime VIA DNA who were so brainwashed during interogation they are unsure if they actually committed the crime or not.

    If I recall correctly the judge that turned down Armstrong's last legal action stated that the USADA's methodology and arbitration was sufficient.
    and the feds also stated there was not enough evidence to go after Lance, so which is it?
    Your legal opinion is obviously superior....
    Since I have dealt with false accusations myself before I know first hand what it is like.

    Of course I care about the truth. I don't understand unjustified hero worship of scumbags, that's all.
    Yea so why do you support the USADA who has no regard for personal rights?

    As for 911, it was a terrible thing, but Occam's razor fits the bill. The truth of nutjob Arabs deciding to fly planes into the towers is the simpliest and most likely explaination.

    Drew
    Yea 15 of the supposed Hijackers were from saudi so we invade Iraq and Afganistan (which happens to have nearly two trillion in minerals which we just happen to find during a war) meanwhile we also conclude the worlds largest Arms Deal since Obama was in office with saudi, yea lol obviously it is as the govy tell us
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yuC_4mGTs98

  66. #66
    sock puppet
    Reputation: osokolo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    8,061
    Quote Originally Posted by Blurr View Post
    see above I already answered.

    . You never read the links or you would understand why eye whitness testimony is unreliable, so I will explain it to you. One in relation to this investigation you have people claiming to see something merely to save their own skin.
    Two people often think they see something and they never did
    three if you tell people something enough they will themselves think they were part of it. THere are people who were found innocent of a crime VIA DNA who were so brainwashed during interogation they are unsure if they actually committed the crime or not.

    and the feds also stated there was not enough evidence to go after Lance, so which is it?
    Since I have dealt with false accusations myself before I know first hand what it is like.

    Yea so why do you support the USADA who has no regard for personal rights?



    Yea 15 of the supposed Hijackers were from saudi so we invade Iraq and Afganistan meanwhile we also conclude the worlds largest Arms Deal since Obama was in office with saudi, yea lol obviously it is as the govy tell us
    of course it is not just the "eye witness" testimonies - nice try

    Armstrong tested POSITIVE twice. There is no eye witness evidence here - no need for it. Both times UCI let him go, and he paid significant amount of money to UCI - which is unheard of. So much about "he never tested positive". He did. If you are seeking the truth - then tell the truth.

    Also - the money trail and email records have nothing to do with "eye witness accounts".

    It is quite fine if you choose to believe whatever you want. Sure - let's blame govy for taking down Armstrong too. If govy organized 911 - why not have fun taking Armstrong down anyway - he is an American hero after all. Hero no more.

    Quite honestly - I think it'd be more prudent if you just said that you didn't care about all the evidence and chose to warship Armstrong despite all the evidence then to question such an obvious pile of evidence - that makes a lot of sense.

    Sanduski was just convicted in the court of law - based on witness testimonies alone. He is as adamant as Lance that he didn't do it.

    You think the outcome of Lance court case would be any different?

    Wait until the court cases start to pile up once all those that Armstrong prosecuted during his career start suing him.

    Actevegin is a prohibited substance that is used to enhance oxygen blood transport.

    Actovegin - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    Armstrong makes an obvious reference to this substance - which is part of the evidence as well...

    Dru was asking you how you can deny it?

    As well as 2 positive tests for banned substance?

    As well as continuing to deal with the damned doctor - which he said he didn't.

    These are not eye witness testimonies, but the simple truth. The truth that you strongly endorse and fight for. So what is YOUR truth about only these 3 instances mentioned above.

  67. #67
    dru
    dru is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    2,444
    Come on, this is yet more B.S. and avoidance of my question

    Here's what I asked you, again...

    How do you explain the Activegin?
    How do you explain Armstrong's lying about Ferrari?
    Specifically that he severed ties in 2004?
    How do you explain the $400,000 Armstrong paid Ferrari the next two years?
    Remember, Armstrong lied about this under oath.
    Why would he lie?

    And here's your reply:

    #3 see above I already answered.

    #2 Oh so before the investigation lance was proven guilty in the court of law of doping?
    You do know that Lance only has one nut and already takes a legal dose of testosterone, Im sure as would anyone you would hire the best to make sure you stayed within the legal limit, or maybe not, but if he did not, the the testing should have caught it, if it didnt, then again, there is a problem with your testing then it aught to be changed.

    #1 Wait, so you support the USADA who is weaving a subjective story (most often lies please read my above links) yet would dare criticize lance for trying to save his career against an organization he knows he cannot win against? Seriously?
    Try answering the questions about the Actevegin. That isn't subjective, the media found it, and the French cops investigated. It is a matter of public record.

    Next the Ferrari stuff. Again, tell me your thoughts on the $300k in '05, '06
    The business retaltionship?
    The lying?
    Please!

    You never read the links or you would understand why eye whitness testimony is unreliable, so I will explain it to you.
    Clearly you have Jesus-like supernatural powers, and can see what I've read on my computer even though you aren't in my house....

    and the feds also stated there was not enough evidence to go after Lance, so which is it?
    yes the courts and the USADA can have it both ways since the cases and charges are different after all, but you already know that.....

    Yea so why do you support the USADA who has no regard for personal rights?
    The judge said, as I've already said, that the system was robust enough to go forward. Armstrong can afford the best lawyers on the planet, so your issue of 'personal rights' is pur B.S. again.

    If it were any different do you think Armstrong would have lost his court challenge?

    Yea 15 of the supposed Hijackers were from saudi so we invade Iraq and Afganistan meanwhile we also conclude the worlds largest Arms Deal since Obama was in office with saudi, yea lol obviously it is as the govy tell us
    As you know, Afghanistan was where Bin Laden was, and where the camps were and are. Iraq was about oil and some PNAC wet dream as you know, as well. The Saudi Royals are only in power because of US military aid. The hatred of the Saudi people towards America is exactly why the US gov. supports the Royals as much as they do, otherwise the counrty would fall into the hands of the nutjob fundamentalists.
    occasional cyclist

  68. #68
    meh... whatever
    Reputation: monogod's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    5,305
    Quote Originally Posted by Blurr View Post
    First off I care that all this was decided OUTSIDE of he court of law
    then take it up with lance.

    decided outside of a court of law? yes. by who? lance himself. why? because lance didn't want it to go to court. evidence gathering is not decision making. that is simply putting everything in the basket to present in a court of law against the accused.

    lance KNEW what the evidence was so he made SURE it was decided outside of a court of law. why? simple. he knew that if it went to court a finding of guilt would be the ONLY outcome and then it would be legally proven that he was a lying, cheating, doping fraud -- whereas now he can, is, and will continue (until he grows some integrity) to claim it was never "proven". (i.e. legally adjudicated)

    by dropping his "fight" against the "witch hunt" (i couldn't even type that with a straight face) he was willingly and with complicity stripped of the titles -- but the flip side is he will always be able to say "it was never proven". proven, however, it most definitely has been.

    further, by capitulating he was simply stripped of the titles, which would have happened anyway had it gone to court, but he likewise avoided millions in fines/penalties, more than a few perjury charges, being dropped by his sponsors, and of course the worldwide headlines of "LANCE IS GUILTY!!!".

    dropping the fight was irrefutably unconscionable for an innocent man while just as certainly a brilliant move for a guilty one.
    "Knowledge is good." ~ Emil Faber

  69. #69
    No Stranger to danger....
    Reputation: Tone's's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    4,596
    Quote Originally Posted by monogod View Post
    then take it up with lance.

    decided outside of a court of law? yes. by who? lance himself. why? because lance didn't want it to go to court. evidence gathering is not decision making. that is simply putting everything in the basket to present in a court of law against the accused.

    lance KNEW what the evidence was so he made SURE it was decided outside of a court of law. why? simple. he knew that if it went to court a finding of guilt would be the ONLY outcome and then it would be legally proven that he was a lying, cheating, doping fraud -- whereas now he can, is, and will continue (until he grows some integrity) to claim it was never "proven". (i.e. legally adjudicated)

    by dropping his "fight" against the "witch hunt" (i couldn't even type that with a straight face) he was willingly and with complicity stripped of the titles -- but the flip side is he will always be able to say "it was never proven". proven, however, it most definitely has been.

    further, by capitulating he was simply stripped of the titles, which would have happened anyway had it gone to court, but he likewise avoided millions in fines/penalties, more than a few perjury charges, being dropped by his sponsors, and of course the worldwide headlines of "LANCE IS GUILTY!!!".

    dropping the fight was irrefutably unconscionable for an innocent man while just as certainly a brilliant move for a guilty one.
    Mono, on this one i fully agree with you, well said if i may say so....
    Dont ever let the truth get in the way of a funny story....

  70. #70
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Blurr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    2,335
    Quote Originally Posted by monogod View Post
    then take it up with lance.

    decided outside of a court of law? yes. by who? lance himself. why? because lance didn't want it to go to court. evidence gathering is not decision making. that is simply putting everything in the basket to present in a court of law against the accused.

    lance KNEW what the evidence was so he made SURE it was decided outside of a court of law. why? simple. he knew that if it went to court a finding of guilt would be the ONLY outcome and then it would be legally proven that he was a lying, cheating, doping fraud -- whereas now he can, is, and will continue (until he grows some integrity) to claim it was never "proven". (i.e. legally adjudicated)

    by dropping his "fight" against the "witch hunt" (i couldn't even type that with a straight face) he was willingly and with complicity stripped of the titles -- but the flip side is he will always be able to say "it was never proven". proven, however, it most definitely has been.
    Oh really it was proven since he passed all his tests and apparently is only guilty by association? Man I grew out of that **** when I was in gradeschool, sad you didnt.

    further, by capitulating he was simply stripped of the titles, which would have happened anyway had it gone to court, but he likewise avoided millions in fines/penalties, more than a few perjury charges, being dropped by his sponsors, and of course the worldwide headlines of "LANCE IS GUILTY!!!".

    dropping the fight was irrefutably unconscionable for an innocent man while just as certainly a brilliant move for a guilty one.
    lol seriously? He is guilty because he chose not to go to court against a system he could not win against? The only thing which proves his innocence was the testing which nobody seems to give a **** about.
    . But for those of you living in a fairly land of subjectivity, it really doesnt matter anyhow, everything against him is subjective speculative, what a tiny primative world you live in.

  71. #71
    No. Just No.
    Reputation: Circlip's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    5,150
    Quote Originally Posted by Blurr View Post
    He is guilty because he chose not to go to court against a system he could not win against?
    It's not the system that Armstrong was afraid to go up against. It was the evidence.

  72. #72
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    897
    Blurr one thing about your allusion to the inadequacy of eye witness testimony is that in many of the cases the eye witness does not know the person.

    "Pick out the perpetrator" in a line up is far different than "I saw my friend do X" Eye witness testimony in the case of strangers is about as good as no evidence at all. In the case of acquaintances I have to assume it is better.

  73. #73
    No. Just No.
    Reputation: Circlip's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    5,150
    Quote Originally Posted by sxotty View Post
    Blurr one thing about your allusion to the inadequacy of eye witness testimony is that in many of the cases the eye witness does not know the person.

    "Pick out the perpetrator" in a line up is far different than "I saw my friend do X" Eye witness testimony in the case of strangers is about as good as no evidence at all. In the case of acquaintances I have to assume it is better.
    I agree. There's no question of misidentification here.

    Furthermore, this isn't a case of "I heard a gunshot, then a man ran away from the scene." scenario based on fleeting, momentary observations in the midst of a life-threatening scenario.

  74. #74
    AZ
    AZ is offline
    banned
    Reputation: AZ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    19,201
    Quote Originally Posted by Blurr View Post
    Oh really it was proven since he passed all his tests and apparently is only guilty by association? Man I grew out of that **** when I was in gradeschool, sad you didnt.



    No he did not. He failed tests in 1999 as has been demonstrated many times in these threads. It is nothing more than a myth perpetuated by Lance and his supporters, just like the myth that he has been tested more than 500 times. He has been tested approx. 150 times and has failed at least 6 of those.

  75. #75
    meh... whatever
    Reputation: monogod's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    5,305
    Quote Originally Posted by Circlip View Post
    It's not the system that Armstrong was afraid to go up against. It was the evidence.
    precisely.
    "Knowledge is good." ~ Emil Faber

  76. #76
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Blurr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    2,335
    Quote Originally Posted by Circlip View Post
    It's not the system that Armstrong was afraid to go up against. It was the evidence.
    thats true you cannot beat subjective evidence, its a joke.

  77. #77
    meh... whatever
    Reputation: monogod's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    5,305
    Quote Originally Posted by Blurr View Post
    thats true you cannot beat subjective evidence, its a joke.
    his failed drug tests: objective or subjective?
    his high dollar payout to the uci in response to a failed drug test: objective or subjective?
    sworn eye witness accounts from 26 people of his doping: objective or subjective?
    people that gave sworn testimony that they doped with him: objective or subjective?
    over a million $ paid to ferrari by lance between 1996-2006 despite lance publicly disavowing having contact with him: objective or subjective?
    his failed test from a preserved sample which conveniently carried no sanction: objective or subjective?
    eye witness accounts of his wife kristin passing out banned substances to riders: objective or subjective?
    eye witness accounts of kristin saying doping was, "a necessary evil": objective or subjective?
    racers, including lance, not showing up for races where testing was being done: objective or subjective?
    lance not showing up at his hotel when testers were present and testing: objective or subjective?

    lance quit the fight cuz he's dirty as sin and is totally in damage control mode now. due to a lack of legal adjudication of guilt he, and his blind supporters (i.e. YOU) can always claim he was innocent. he had more than fair opportunity to face his accusers with his own evidence and he VOLUNTARILY elected not to.

    per your claim that the process was biased or somehow illegal/unethical let's keep in mind that lance took out a UCI pro license every year, and in doing so the agreed implicitly to be under the jurisdiction of WADA and its affiliates including the USADA and their arbitration procedures. thus, there is no foundation for you, lance, or his lawyers to claim that the process is biased since he explicitly, willingly, and without coercion agreed to it.

    lance specifically agreed to the following protocol found here under "adjudication".

    notice that the USADA hearings are conducted per a version of the American Arbitration Association's Commercial Rules. go here and look under the "rules and procedures" tab and read sections r-30 and r-31. specifically:

    "Witnesses for each party shall also submit to questions from the arbitrator and the adverse party. The arbitrator has the discretion to vary this procedure, provided that the parties are treated with equality and that each party has the right to be heard and is given a fair opportunity to present its case."

    and

    "The parties may offer such evidence as is relevant and material to the dispute and shall produce such evidence as the arbitrator may deem necessary to an understanding and determination of the dispute. Conformity to legal rules of evidence shall not be necessary. All evidence shall be taken in the presence of all of the arbitrators and all of the parties, except where any of the parties is absent, in default or has waived the right to be present."

    thus, there is absolutely ZERO argument that the process was suspect due to to not being conducted via "legal rules of evidence" since lance, by his own volition, agreed to not be bound by them and to be wholly subject to the USADA's investigation, arbitration, and adjudication process.

    lance agreed to be bound by these procedures yet now claims it's unfair? yet another lie from lance "liar liar pants on fire" armstrong.
    Last edited by monogod; 10-14-2012 at 04:45 PM.
    "Knowledge is good." ~ Emil Faber

  78. #78
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    897
    Quote Originally Posted by monogod View Post
    per your claim that the process was biased or somehow illegal/unethical let's keep in mind that lance took out a UCI pro license every year, and in doing so the agreed implicitly to be under the jurisdiction of WADA and its affiliates including the USADA and their arbitration procedures. thus, there is no foundation for you, lance, or his lawyers to claim that the process is biased since he explicitly, willingly, and without coercion agreed to it.
    This is really the important part. Lance did agree to the lax rules of evidence they have and thus he should not be whining about the unfairness of it all.

    That does not mean I cannot complain about the crappy evidence though I am still sorely disappointed by how poor it is and how easily some of the problems could have been remedied. If they had the prosecutor might not have dropped the case.

  79. #79
    sock puppet
    Reputation: osokolo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    8,061
    Quote Originally Posted by sxotty View Post
    This is really the important part. Lance did agree to the lax rules of evidence they have and thus he should not be whining about the unfairness of it all.

    That does not mean I cannot complain about the crappy evidence though I am still sorely disappointed by how poor it is and how easily some of the problems could have been remedied. If they had the prosecutor might not have dropped the case.
    it is interesting how the evidence is poor to you and only a few others, but so overwhelming to me. money trail, incriminating emails, statements (his wife's - she is not one of the "cheaters"), failed tests, etc...

    i don't really know what other evidence you really require.... this case will end up in court - no doubt about it.

  80. #80
    meh... whatever
    Reputation: monogod's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    5,305
    Quote Originally Posted by sxotty View Post
    Lance did agree to the lax rules of evidence they have...
    "conformity to legal rules of evidence is not necessary" does not mean the rules of evidence are lax.

    the procedure for introduction of evidence, testimony, arbitration, and adjudication are actually rather strict, structured, and heavily sanctioned. you'd know that had you bothered to actually read the information provided to you from the sanctioning bodies themselves.

    the REALLY important thing to remember is that lance agreed to these conditions yet REFUSED to face his accusers or introduce contradictory evidence. why? CUZ HE HAD NONE!!!!

    know why he had none? cuz all the people he doped with testified AGAINST him. get this... mr. 7-time world champion has no one to come to his rescue and aid because there is NO ONE who can provide contradictory testimony!

    the house of cards is a-tumblin' down...

    Quote Originally Posted by sxotty
    That does not mean I cannot complain about the crappy evidence though I am still sorely disappointed by how poor it is
    huh?!?!?!?!?

    multiple failed substance tests are crappy evidence?
    documented financial transfers of over a million bucks spanning 10 years to a known, verified, certified "dirty doctor" lance claims to not have ANY contact with is crappy evidence?
    dozens of sworn affidavits and testimony from eyewitnesses that not only saw him doping but doped with him are crappy evidence?
    the plethoric list of evidence previously mentioned by myself and others which i won't even bother to mention YET AGAIN is crappy evidence?

    just to make it clear, the evidence against him is MORE than substantial enough to quickly and easily obtain a conviction against him in an open court of law.

    jeez, at this point you lance-o-philes could have injected him yourself and yet would still deny it happened...
    "Knowledge is good." ~ Emil Faber

  81. #81
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    897
    The prosecutor already dropped the case because the evidence was poor. Not because of any other reason. From what I understand nothing in this report is new to what the prosecution had that decided to drop the case. If that is true it implies there are plenty of others who thought the evidence was poor. There is a reason that the agreement specifically states conformity to legal rules of evidence is not necessary. I am actually surprised how great a lot of people think the evidence is. There is a lot of it no doubt, but most is really not very good.

    Look at the samples which were numbered according to the stage and rider position. They were supposed to be numbered in a way that the lab would not know who each sample belonged to so that there was no way to fudge the results. Why didn't they actually do that? Because someone was either lazy, foolish, or incompetent.

    Anyway at this point I don't know that there is anything left to discuss. My stance is still that the quality of the evidence was not that great, that is why I believe the prosecution dropped the case. My stance is also that he is guilty as sin and so are the vast majority of riders of that era and frankly likely every era. I haven't seen anything new or exciting to change that. I thought they were going to have a bunch of new failed drug tests. Someone linked to that previously.

  82. #82
    No. Just No.
    Reputation: Circlip's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    5,150
    Quote Originally Posted by sxotty View Post
    That does not mean I cannot complain about the crappy evidence though I am still sorely disappointed by how poor it is and how easily some of the problems could have been remedied. If they had the prosecutor might not have dropped the case.
    The evidence compiled by USADA is completely separate from that compiled by the U.S. Department of Justice. While their may be some overlap, they weren't even intending to bring the same charges. USADA's case concerned non-criminal anti-doping violations. The DOJ investigation was for criminal charges of fraud, wire transfer fraud, money laundering, etc. It's incorrect to mix these two up. If the DOJ was investigating doping violations (which it wasn't), the body of evidence available may have been entirely sufficient to bring charges and perhaps also to gain a conviction.

    As it was, the criminal case was dropped by the U.S. district attorney Andre Birotte, but it's incorrect to assume that it was for lack of sufficient evidence. This was a highly charged political situation, and Birotte refused to give any reason why the case was dropped. It may yet be reopened now that the USADA case has permeated so far into the mainstream that it can't be so easily whitewashed for possible political reasons.

  83. #83
    meh... whatever
    Reputation: monogod's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    5,305
    Quote Originally Posted by sxotty View Post
    The prosecutor already dropped the case because the evidence was poor. Not because of any other reason.
    really? i don't recall reading that anywhere, but if you have a link please post it. quite the opposite, in fact.

    from the ap:

    "In a press release, United States Attorney Andre Birotte Jr. says the case has been closed but didn't disclose the reason for the decision."


    did birotte disclose it to you?


    also, the USADA and DOJ were investigating entirely different things. though some of the evidence may overlap (like the financial transfers to ferarri) most of the investigations were mutually exclusive.


    Quote Originally Posted by sxotty
    From what I understand nothing in this report is new to what the prosecution had that decided to drop the case. If that is true it implies there are plenty of others who thought the evidence was poor.
    moot point. non-sequitur.

    again, the report had no bearing on what the DOJ was investigating.

    Quote Originally Posted by sxotty
    I am actually surprised how great a lot of people think the evidence is. There is a lot of it no doubt, but most is really not very good.
    oh brother....

    Quote Originally Posted by sxotty
    My stance is still that the quality of the evidence was not that great, that is why I believe the prosecution dropped the case.
    well, you're free to believe what you want but your stated belief is based on facts not in evidence.

    fact:


    we don't know why the DOJ dropped their UNRELATED investigation because birotte DIDN'T DISCLOSE THE REASON.

    Quote Originally Posted by sxotty
    My stance is also that he is guilty as sin
    werd!
    Last edited by monogod; 10-14-2012 at 06:58 PM.
    "Knowledge is good." ~ Emil Faber

  84. #84
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Stugotz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    427
    <iframe width="640" height="480" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/42um4KoRNCI" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
    Speed Kills...It kills those that don't have it!
    German Engineering in Da Haus, Ja!

Members who have read this thread: 0

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •