So how does that sit with the nay-sayers? Does that sway the argument at all or is he still guilty until proven guilty?
There's no chance of that.The nay-sayers belive him guilty without any proof.You can only prove he's guilty,(a positive test) its impossible to prove his innocence, if you belive he's taken drugs but just not been caught.
Wot Taxi says - there is plenty of evidence of his drug taking but no proof. You cannot prove a negative tho - so he ( nor anyone else) can never be proven not to have taken drugs
What 'evidence' TJ
Evidence?
The media would be all over it
The French would be all over it
There's no evidence, and plenty of tests to prove he's clean.
Do we have to do this again? In brief. The old samples tested in ways that were not available when the samples were given and found positive. Sworn statements from several people who were in a position to know ( he sued for libel then settled out of court to shut them up but prevent the claims being tested in court), many of his closest team mates caught cheating.
This and many other things are "evidence" but fall far short of "proof"
Think of all those implicated in the balco affair who were never tested positive but now are known to have been cheating. The drug cheats in the USA have been one step ahead of the testers all the way. Negative testing is no proof he is clean. You cannot prove a negative
You're full of shit TJ
He has never been proved to be anywhere near guilty of taking anything. Quit ya trolling
He's innocent until proven guilty. Just like MJ. And OJ.
A few references
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lance_Armstrong#Allegations_of_drug_use
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5508863
Have a read?
None of this nor the many other allegations out there are proof. It is however evidence
Steve - I ain't trolling. I sincerely believe he is a drug cheat. I do not say it is proven - merely that there is evidence
....and even if he has taken drugs..... what, were they stronger than everyone else's?
He's still won the tour 7 times!
I ain't even won it once! 😉
A few thoughts:
1) Who cares if he took drugs or not? He has been an inspiration to a lot of people. Why jeopardise this? He also brought a lot to the sport ('that' look, using tv to fool opponents etc etc).
2) Maybe he took drugs before having cancer, maybe afterwards - do you see them as two 'different careers'?
3) How much do drug cheats change in your eyes? Hamilton may have been a cheat (and come up with some pathetic excuses), but he still placed with a broken collar bone...
4) Sorry TJ, all your 'evidence' is completely circumstantial at best...
Just thoughts - nothing more! (Except the last one! And the third one, come to think of it.)
TandemJeremy - MemberA few references
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lance_Armstrong#Allegations_of_drug_usehttp://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5508863
Have a read?
None of this nor the many other allegations out there are proof. It is however evidence
Ah, if its got a Wikipedia entry it must be true!!!
Disgruntled ex-employees and team mates trying to discredit someone is hardly evidence.
What the fock does it matter if Lance Armstrong's taken performance enhancing drugs? Bjarne Riis did, Marco Pantani did, Tom Simpson did, In fact, just about all of them did, (including me, though mine were all purely recreational and my only claim to professional cycling is having been a messenger for a few years 😉 ). Anyway, they were all part of a racing culture in which drugs were endemic and they, and others, were all undeniably brilliant & extraordinary cyclists. The real problem with drugs in cycling has been the continual denial of the extent of the problem by the authorites & organisations responsible for professional cycle racing and the lack of guts in dealing with the issues. Time perhaps for some sort of a truth and reconciliation commission regarding racers usage of drugs and a non-moralistic fresh start or maybe an acknowledgement & acceptance that these substances are a part of everyday professional bike racing and a new, level playing field created.
Sorry TJ, all your 'evidence' is completely circumstantial at best...
Yup -and hearsay. As I repeatedly said it is evidence but not proof.
TJ,
From your first reference:
...fell so short of scientific standards that it was "completely irresponsible" to suggest they "constitute evidence of anything."
which was coming from a supposedly independent report commission by the UCI.
Boring, Boring, Boring. The guy has done f all since coming back but has had so much coverage, too much f twittering and playing the media not enough riding. I get the impression people are just interested in him rather than the cycling which is very very sad. Particularly since there has been some great races already this year, Paris Nice- great great racing, milan San Remo- win for Cav( FFS Lance got dropped on the cipressa) etc. But it seems nobody is interested in that, they are far more interested in s about Lance!
He is a one trick pony who will do f*** all in the Giro and get his ass whipped by Berty, Cadel, the Schlecks et al in the tour.Then hopefully he will go away .
[i]He is a one trick pony who will do f*** all in the Giro and get his ass whipped by Berty, Cadel, the Schlecks et al in the tour.Then hopefully he will go away .[/i]
Agree with that - except for the Cadel bit, as the idiot will probably opt to sit on his wheel for 3 weeks and loose 10 seconds to lance in the individual TT's. Always the bridesmaid, and a troll ugly one at that.
Well there'll only be one of the Schlecks at the Giro, and Cadel whilst not the most aggressive rider had such a pisspoor team that he was riding all the main climbs unsupported whereas the other GC riders had teams with strength in depth - this year however, they've got Charlie Wegelius to support in the mountains.
LA, as ED2001 succinctly puts it, will do nothing and is distracting from the real class riders out there now racing.
Anyway, Astana may not end up riding the TdF this year as apparently they're not paying their riders regularly and sponsors are pulling out.
Only really defunct Saunier Duval (however it's spelt) had more than two in the end of mountain stages thou - although, yes his team was poor. I just can't see Evans winning - not this year.
That's the point though, you have your mountain domestiques to get you to the last climb, chase down breaks for you then you're in a good position to attack when it'll have the most effect - exactly what Sastre did on l'Alpe d'Huez. Cadel was forced to chase down the Schlecks on his own, breaking his rhythm and making him expend too much energy too early on. Silence-Lotto had brought in Popovych to do that but he didn't do his job and wasn't there when it really mattered to bury himself for his GC leader. Charlie Wegelius should be a much better rider for Cadel than Popvych ever was.
If Armstrong rides the TdF, it will be a all out ride. If he's not up to it, he'll retire early or make it clear he's a super domestic for the team, but if he is up to it, then he'll be going for the win.
I don't believe he's dirty, because I have never seen such a witch hunt without a result before. Of course they haven't tried burning him or ducking him yet.
I'll be cheering for him, but hoping Cadel will win.
I ain't even won it once!
Stratobiker; that's 'cos you spend too much time, looking at pictures of the lovely, diminutive Antipodean Pop Princess, instead of sticking to a grueling training regime required to be able to compete in one of the World's toughest sporting events. You've only got yourself to blame.
Hmm, putting yourself through absolute torture, for 3 weeks, or looking at pictures of a lady with a very nice bottom?
[img] 
[/img]
I shall probbly [i]not[/i] be winning the Tour de France, this year.