Forum menu
Another thought on this..(Im having a good day - multiple thinking stuff going on!)
The evidence wasnt good enough for a US Attorney to prosecute but its good for USADA? I have to admit Im scratching my head over that one a little bit...UNLESS there is new evidence?
or a lower standard of proof?
there was rumours about political interference in the us attorneys investigation and decision to drop it as criminal charges were being prepared.
I do hope they have something more tho or else it will fizzle out
mrlebowski - Member
I'll be happy to admit he's a doper if he's proved to be so - will you admit he's clean if he's not convicted?
Innocence through lack of proof of guilt - it means he's innocent in the eyes of the law, as I said above, along with amny others, there's too much evidence the other way IMO for me to believe this.
I'm sorry but if good lab work proves he was doping then there isn't anything to argue about.
It would be good for cycling (and all sport) if we look for cheats, shame them, prosecute them and remove them. Regardless of how long it takes.
Cheating is not sporting and letting it go by unchallenged is bad for sport.
I do hope they have something more tho or else it will fizzle out
You're just desperate for him to be found guilty aren't you?
There are zero positives in this (including zero positive dope tests against Armstong...)
LA is one of the few people that transcends cycling, he's bigger than the sport; trashing him trashes cycling, and this has been going on for years. The focus should be on catching dopers now. If he doped then as I pointed out earlier he definitely wasn't the only doper in the peloton so its essentially pointless.
Thats one of the most damming pieces of [i]evidence[/i] crikey.
Inadmissible as the samples are old and the wada code does not allow for retrospective testing
People claim the accusers all have agendas - I don't know what Ashendens agenda could be
REALMAN "Armstrong being found guilty in any way would be bad for cycling. I like cycling. So I choose to believe that Armstrong is innocent. I choose to believe he was a fantastic athlete and an awesome inspiration. It's a good feeling. If you don't like him, that's fair enough. But wanting him to be found guilty is wanting bad things to happen to cycling. For the greater good and what not, it would be better to let him be. The only good that can come from him being found guilty is for a few grumpy old men on internet forums to have a massive "I told you so" orgy, and I'm not even sure that's a good thing. Besides, Lance has the best tweets."
Having a laugh???
Well Said, in total agreement with you there
Love the irony - it is ironic? isn't it??
I don't have any issues with Lance, but I do have issues with the so-called "pinnacles of achievement", the role models, those who inspire, (whether cyclists, other sports stars or other public figures), when they are not actually what they are portrayed as.
If he is / was a worthy champion, he should be vindicated as such.
If not, he should be exposed as a fraud, stripped of his titles and prosecuted.
Quite simple really.
crazylegs - not quite what I meant ( i realised afterwards tho thats how it sounded)- what I meant was it is pointless going after him again without new and strong evidence. No one wins if its just the same old he said she said.
No point in grandstanding - either have the stuff to nail him good and proper or shut up
Reckon we should be dope testing some posters the way they crack on about stuff and always seem a bit cranky. I mean no vehement anti-dope poster would even remotely have a history of illegal drug usage would they..........
TJ: apologies, I misread your earlier comment.
No point in grandstanding - either have the stuff to nail him good and proper or shut up
Agreed.
For the people saying 'let it go', it's worth pointing out that some of the allegations in the USADA letter specifically relate to doping practices "...through to the present"
Bruyneel Johan - currently manager of Team Radioshack Nissan Trek
Pedro Celaya - currently doctor of same team
José Pepi Marti - currently trainer at Saxo Bank
Lance Armstrong - currently winning Triathalons
crazylegs - it wasn't clearly expressed hence the clarification - ta tho
Innocence through lack of proof of guilt - it means he's innocent in the eyes of the law, as I said above, along with amny others, there's too much evidence the other way IMO for me to believe this.
Fair enough, thats your opinion - I can respect that.
either have the stuff to nail him good and proper or shut up
totally agree.
this isn't just about Lance Armstrong. Doping isn't done by an individual, there are Doctors and others who may still be involved in the sport and in my opinion it is them who need to be found out and dealt with appropriately.
Um, everyone asking for 'evidence' might want to read through the actual letter that was sent out, and look at the number of times eyewitnesses have said they saw EPO, blood transfusions, Testosterone, Human Growth hormone, Corticosteroids,saline and plasma infusions being used by Lance.
I'm just wondering what the real motive is for USADA to prosecute him. The fact that he's walked away from quite a high level of investigation with no conviction shows that he's either clean or [i]very[/i] good at getting away with it.
I don't really buy the whole 'witch hunt' idea, unless Sheryl Crow has some very influential friends.
Maybe they're trying to break the culture of secrecy up a bit.
Either the testing shows it or it doesn't.
Personal testimony is worth what someone is getting out of it, either reduction or absolution for their crimes or something for seeing the rest fall.
I think bust any one for whom there is a valid sample for any performance enhancing drug now on the list. Regardless of whether it was banned at the time they were engaged in trying to attain an unfair advantage and so are guilty of perverting the rules of fair play.
Nah, too tricky to do and would cause too much litigation I'd imagine. "Sorry, you didn't win the TdF in 1980 because we've decided to ban lucozade this year, but it was perfectly legal when you won."
Though it does bring up a question to me - when does something become banned? Presumably there are many millions spend every year in all sports to be the best - nutrition, fitness regimes, equipment etc. - when does a cocktail of vitamins every day turn from good to bad?
These will be the last charges he has to answer IMO, its about as high as it can go.
So, lets all walk away from this thread and all agree to abide by the decision made!
The really interesting thing is not Armstrong, not even Bruyneel, or any of the dodgy doctors...
The really interesting thing is the UCI; Hein Verbruggen and Pat McQuaid must be looking through brochures for retirement homes right about now, because if Armstrong and Bruyneel go, there are some very searching questions going to be asked about Armstrongs 'donations' to the UCI.
Kimmage was right.
Check out the list of dopers
merckx, Freddy Maertens, tommy simpson, moser, pedro delgado, fignon, sean yeates..
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_doping_cases_in_cycling
there are some very searching questions going to be asked about Armstrongs 'donations' to the UCI.
Good point. MAJOR repercussions that go beyond LA, Postal & Floyd..
I think there is a small chance Lance may be in for a fall here.
That said, his [b]allegedly[/b] Livestrong funded legal team are powerful and too many important parties stand to lose out in a big way.
What????? for the greater good if he is guilty - and I am sure he is - then the truth needs to out.to say its the greater good to allow a cheat to get away with it?
One of the biggest obstacles to dealing with drugs in cycling is not the riders, but the attitude of the fans. It's very difficult to see cycling really cleaning itself up when people are still prepared to overlook alleged cheating and "move on" because it's "just entertainment" or "everyone's at it".
I'm sorry, but this is puerile nonsense.'Bad for cycling?
How about being bad for cyclists that the most influential cyclist in the world was as bad a drug cheat as the rest?You can 'choose' to believe what ever you want, but as the evidence stacks up you will end up with your eyes shut and your fingers in your ears.
Lance is a massive inspiration - he is one of the best and most successful athletes the world has ever seen, up there with Ali, Usain, Federer (or Nadal), Peat, Jordan, Merckx, Phelps, Woods, and so on.
When you think of pro cycling, you think of Lance. What he did was amazing, and he dominates the history of modern pro cycling.
If you want the history of modern pro cycling to be dominated by cheating, then charging him with drug abuse is a good way of doing that.
If you want to drag up old stuff, which will just give people the view that cyclist are all druggies again, then charge Lance.
Let's pretend he's innocent for a second - now what happens?
Well cycling had an epic hero who battled cancer then stormed to 7 TdF wins in a row, all whilst clean. Cycling, people with cancer, and just people in general, have this awe inspiring figure to look up to. Not only did he do this, but he raised cancer awareness massively, and is staying active, in mountain biking first, and now he's gone back to triathlons.
If he's guilty, but not charged?
Well cycling had an epic hero who battled cancer then stormed to 7 TdF wins in a row, all whilst clean. Cycling, people with cancer, and just people in general, have this awe inspiring figure to look up to. Not only did he do this, but he raised cancer awareness massively, and is staying active, in mountain biking first, and now he's gone back to triathlons.
Also, some guy gets away with cheating.
If he's guilty, and charged?
Well cycling had another 7 years of cheating added to it's history. Cycling, people with cancer, and just people in general, are suddenly lost when their hero is suddenly tarnished as a cheat and a fraud. Not only did he do this, but he keeps cheating, in mountain biking first, and now he's gone back to triathlons.
Also, some guy on some internet forum gets to say I told you so.
You can have justice, and destroy cycling. Or you can let it go, and do the good thing. Yeah, one guy who may possibly be guilty may go free. And that's not great. But it's better then the alternative. What we should be doing is looking to make sure that we don't have cheaters right now, and in the future. Let's leave the past behind.
If you go blindly searching for "justice", just be aware of what you might find. Careful what you wish for and all that.
Also, he could be innocent. Remember, you gotta dance like Lance man, spinners are winners.
I struggle with long sentences
if I, as an amateur cyclist, wanted to take performance enhancing drugs, could I?
if so, what could I take, ignoring the risk of heart attacks, death, etc.
Ignoring the risks?
Stimulants like cocaine and amphetamines will increase your speed / power on the day - at a cost when you come down and at great risk to your cardivascular system
Opiates will increase your tolerance to pain and the amphet will stop you getting too relaxed
Steriods make it easier to increase lean muscle mass and to train harder.
No point in grandstanding - either have the stuff to nail him good and proper or shut up
I'm glad you clarified that TJ as frankly I found your previous posts a bit disappointing from someone who tends to at least give the benefit of the doubt.
'Not Proven'? That isn't a potential outcome outside Scotland (AFAIK), and I don't think even if it were it's a good enough result .. the debate will plough on regardless of any outcome anyway.
RealMan: nail/head. Brilliantly said.
You can have justice, and destroy cycling
complete rubbish. 🙄
LA convicted of cheating will upset a few yanks. most of europe will have a chuckle (particularly the french but not the spaniards) and cycling will move on and cleaner peloton will work it's way round the roads of europe in what should be a great summer of road cycling.
i didn't see football "destroyed" in italy after the match fixing neither did cricket implode after the cronje or ****stan match fixing.
RealMan - really? What a load of toss...
Presumably you also think that the Leveson Inquiry is also "in the past" so just leave it...?
Don't bother investigating people like Wade, Coulson, Murdochs. it doesn't matter that they (allegedly) committed criminal activity then (allegedly) conspired to cover it up? All a waste of money?
Are you saying that because someone is high profile that they are exempt from normal legal process - or just because they are a sports "star" that you happen to like???
RM, with your history, I'm not surprised you're justifying potential cheating.
Are you saying that because someone is high profile that they are exempt from normal legal process - or just because they are a sports "star" that you happen to like???
I thought he was saying that reality can be quite complex, but I could be mistaken.
Presumably you also think that the Leveson Inquiry is also "in the past" so just leave it...?Don't bother investigating people like Wade, Coulson, Murdochs. it doesn't matter that they (allegedly) committed criminal activity then (allegedly) conspired to cover it up? All a waste of money?
I don't know what any of that stuff is, so can't really comment.
Are you saying that because someone is high profile that they are exempt from normal legal process - or just because they are a sports "star" that you happen to like???
No, I'm just saying that he is a figure head of cycling, whether you like it or not. Finding him guilty is something that cannot be undone, so you best be sure it's the right thing to do before doing it.
i didn't see football "destroyed" in italy after the match fixing neither did cricket implode after the cronje or ****stan match fixing.
I don't really know what any of that is either, but it sounds like a completely different affair.
Imagine you knew, with 100% certainty, that he was innocent - how wonderful would that be?
How awesome would that make this video?
I rode Alpe-d'Huez the other day. I was thinking of Lance at the top. I whacked it in the big ring like he did, and smashed it to pieces. He helped me there. My belief in him helped me.
It's a belief I choose. Yes, I may be blinkered, but ignorance can be bliss. If I knew with 100% certainty that he cheated, I could accept that. But I would be deeply saddened by it.
I thought he was saying that reality can be quite complex, but I could be mistaken.
Thanks 🙂
but he raised cancer awareness massively
Yeah, I never knew about cancer before Lance Armstrong. In what way does 'raising cancer awareness' actually help anyone exactly?
What we should be doing is looking to make sure that we don't have cheaters right now, and in the future. Let's leave the past behind.
And the best way of doing that would be to show that no matter how successful/powerful you are, you won't get away with cheating. It seems like you think the most important thing in this whole affair is for you to be able to maintain your hero worship fantasies.
Realman, Lance has feet of clay, as so many other great heros do, and it hurts when you find this out.
[i]When you think of pro cycling, you think of Lance. What he did was amazing, and he dominates the history of modern pro cycling.[/i]
No.
When younger people think of pro cycling, they think of Lance. Largely due to his Tour victories and the ease with which they convert into once a year column inches. Some of us, who you see fit to slag off as bitter old men can see where and how he fits in, and how much of his success is attributable to performance enhancing drugs.
[i]If you want the history of modern pro cycling to be dominated by cheating, then charging him with drug abuse is a good way of doing that.[/i]
It's already dominated by cheating! Do you live in a cave? Go here and look at all the names;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_doping_cases_in_cycling
/p>
[i]Well cycling had another 7 years of cheating added to it's history. Cycling, people with cancer, and just people in general, are suddenly lost when their hero is suddenly tarnished as a cheat and a fraud. Not only did he do this, but he keeps cheating, in mountain biking first, and now he's gone back to triathlons.[/i]
Yes, actually. Do you want us to pretend everything is ok? Do you want your son to be a good cyclist then find out when he gets to turn pro that the option is dope or go home?
[i]Let's leave the past behind.[/i]
But he's the most influential 'epic hero' of modern times; should we pretend?
Johan Bruyneel is the DS of one of the biggest teams racing; should we pretend?
Hein Verbruggen and Pat McQuaid run cycling from the very top; should we pretend?
[i]Remember, you gotta dance like Lance man, spinners are winners.[/i]
As are those who seem to have taken EPO, Blood transfusions, HGH, Testosterone, Corticosteroids and so on.
Ignoring it will not make it go away, or make it all better, and if you think it will, you're part of the problem.
Go and do some research;
Kimmage
Betsy Andreu
Emma O'Reilly
Michael Ashenden
Christophe Bassons
Fillipo Simeoni
Floyd Landis
Tyler Hamilton
George Hincapie
Read 'Bad Blood' by Jeremy Whittle
Read LA Confidentiel
Educate yourself about the sport you love, it's tough when you realise it's not all as it seems, but it is part of following cycling.
I thought he was saying that reality can be quite complex, but I could be mistaken
Complex, yes. But overall, don't bother, it's in the past, why tear it all down ???
There are plenty of other areas of criminality where enquiries remain open long after the alleged events.
You do know about Father Christmas?
No.
When younger people think of pro cycling, they think of Lance. Largely due to his Tour victories and the ease with which they convert into once a year column inches. Some of us, who you see fit to slag off as bitter old men can see where and how he fits in, and how much of his success is attributable to performance enhancing drugs.
I don't think I've slagged anyone off here, but sorry if it seemed that way.
Although have you not realised that the younger people are the future of cycling - not the old men? Do we want a bunch of old men to be proved right, and the younger people to see cycling as a drug affair, where everyone cheats?
Do you want us to pretend everything is ok? Do you want your son to be a good cyclist then find out when he gets to turn pro that the option is dope or go home?
Yes, I do want to pretend. It's the better thing to do. And I've already said that we should be looking at the present and the future, so unless my son is considering competing in the past, I'm not sure what you're getting at.
As are those who seem to have taken EPO, Blood transfusions, HGH, Testosterone, Corticosteroids and so on.
Sorry, but I love this - are you saying people who spin a higher gear take drugs? LOL.
You're telling me to do research - why? I'm happy with my belief - why would I want to change it? If someone told you they were religious, would you tell them to study quantum mechanics?
I'm happy with my [b]belief[/b] - why would I want to change it?
Oh dear, the religious parallels are clear
If someone told you they were religious, would you tell them to study quantum mechanics?
No, I wouldn't waste the breath
Really, "belief" is for fairy stories, isn't it?
Realman is making absolutely no sense here whatsoever.
"Yes, I do want to pretend. It's the better thing to do." So burying your head in the sand and ignoring it is the best thing to do, rather than looking for the truth?
"we should be looking at the present and the future" Bruyneel is a present (and future) Directeur Sportif. If he's guilty of these charges then it's likely he's still doing the same things, but with a future crop of riders. The sport will never improve unless we get rid of the old guard.
All people are saying is look at the facts rather than bury your head in the ground. If once you've looked at the various testimonies and evidence, then you still feel the same way then so be it.
But to state "You're telling me to do research - why? I'm happy with my belief - why would I want to change it?" you're sounding like a kid sticking his fingers in his ears refusing to hear stuff he doesn't like.
For RealMan
Lance Armstrong:
[img] 
[/img]
😉
It's a logical decision. It makes me happy. I guess I'm more of an optimist then others.
Besides, innocent until proven guilty. At the moment he is, technically, innocent. So it's technically a fact, I think.
Until he's proven guilty, I'm going to enjoy having him as a hero of cycling and life. I'm sorry if that doesn't fit in with your cynicism. Spin it to win it.
realman: [s]have you refunded jimmy yet?[/s] you are talking crap! For the reasons espoused above. LA is not bigger than cycling.