Clubber - good link there about LAF, it ends up on a thread with 50 pages!
I'd hate to be in a court with some of the people
I know, I was on an inquest Jury and the one thing I took away from it was that I hope I'm never wrongly accused of anything and end up on trial. Some people were disgraceful - a combination of not understanding the difference between evidence/facts and strong opinion/probably. Or a case of "what do I need to say to make this end faster".
Jeff Novitzky
This guy isn't interested in whether or not Lance should retain his 7 TdF titles, its more to do with cross-border drug trafficking which the US Authorities will take a lot more seriously. As they will with the fact that his 'charity' site has made him personally $millions. Whats the difference between livestrong.com and livestrong.org?
you guys do know that currently USPS and armstrong are the centre of a federal investigation into systematic doping. ITs not just Landis that has made these accusations he's been backed up by a few ex well known usps riders and guys from other teams.
Head over to bikeradar theres a huge thread running about this and quite a few sad people eagerly awaiting LA's downfall...
Also the EPO retesting of LA's 99 tour sample is not admissable as it wasnt carried out properly, it was conducted by a journalist (who somehow knew the unknown sample was LA's) using an inadmissable test, so draw your own conclusions on that.
And if anyone thought millar was confronted by evidence and he rolled over and admitted everything youre wrong, he strenuously denied it under questioning until he was threatened with a lengthy prison sentence, and only then did he confess...
Wow! Armstrong really gets the petty minded tall poppy trimmers into a frenzy.
I find it hard to believe that after so many tests that he has done anything other than sail close to the wind in an era when drugs were being blatantly abused.
The quality of the information against him seems highly tainted, to say the least.
In any case, I also think a bit of slack should be cut for cancer survivors. It's not a trivial disease and has a massive effect on the body.
I'm pleased he has made a fortune - too many top sportsmen end up sweeping out stadiums in their old age.
Also the EPO retesting of LA's 99 tour sample is not admissable as it wasnt carried out properly, it was conducted by a journalist (who somehow knew the unknown sample was LA's) using an inadmissable test, so draw your own conclusions on that.
Wrong, it was carried out by a french lab, under the exact same conditions all tests are carried out. 12 samples from the 1999 tour contained synthetic EPO. A journalist somehow got hold of the results and key that linked the samples to names. 6 were Armstrongs
I find it hard to believe that after so many tests that he has done anything other than sail close to the wind
how can you 'sail close to the wind'?
he either doped or he didn't
I'm sure he doped, but it doesn't bother me in the least.
Just make the best of the available training techniques init ð
Alot of jealous people in this world. Look to your own achievements first (oh I believe you have).
Warton I stand corrected - but I do know the samples as kept at the laboratory are stored by numbers - someone (the journalist) was given the data to let them link the samples to specific riders which should not have happened...
If he did or not Im not too bothered, I def wont lose any sleep over it, itll be a shame but there is an evergrowing mountain of evidence.
That's a cop out though - you don't have to be jealous to call him out when you think it's clear he doped as much as anyone. FWIW I still admire him as a single minded, tough as hell competitor but much less over the years as a person as more and more about him has come out.
howd that happen - dup post!!
Do you know if they were testing for EPO itself, or metabolites? A glycoprotein like EPO is not especially stable - endogenous half life of several hours IIRC. To test a SIX YEAR old urine sample (ie basic solution of urea) and expect to draw any meaningful conclusions is laughable, tbh. It's as unreliable as the Landis testimony to me.Wrong, it was carried out by a french lab, under the exact same conditions all tests are carried out. 12 samples from the 1999 tour contained synthetic EPO. A journalist somehow got hold of the results and key that linked the samples to names. 6 were Armstrongs
Basically I believe Armstrong doped for commensensical reasons, but the lies people will tell to try and frame him just increases the reasonable doubt that maybe he was clean all along.
I believe they were 'testing' the test ie it wasnt at that time a recognised test...
cant find the original articles re this to confirm..
he has never failed a test but it is hard to believe he was able to beat people who were doped if he was not doping...that would be a super human feat IMHO
There are so many drug cheats in the sport, it is hard to believe that one person was not cheating. This is shameful for the sport which has had doping as an integral part since the days of drinking brandy, then amphetamine etc.
Shame really I think some of the riders today are clean but certainly not them all.
the trouble is with landis is his testimony is gaining more and more credibility- he appears to have given himself an insurance policy in the form of photos and testimony from other riders, and is being supported by Greg Lemond, hes also, on behalf of the 'feds' worn wire taps to meetings with key people which have given them a lot of evidence.
Its a shame its happening but maybe this is whats needed to finally clean up cycling...
and is being supported by Greg Lemond
ð
and is being supported by Greg Lemondð
Alot of jealous people in this world. Look to your own achievements first (oh I believe you have).
Shall we compare and contrast Hora and LeMond?
he has never failed a test but it is hard to believe he was able to beat people who were doped if he was not doping...that would be a super human feat IMHO
Considering the weird things cancer can do to people, it's not beyond the realms of possibility that in the process of being cured his body changed significantly to make him a better cyclist. Don't forget that cancer is cell mutations and it is cell mutations that cause positive evolution. If you look at how rubbish professional human athletes are aerobically compared to some other animal species it's not that mad a concept. Super human in this sense is thus possible!
You do know about the vitorol/hatred and sustained campaign that Lemond has for LA don't you?
Hora, no offence chap, but you're coming across a bit like a kid refusing to believe Santa isn't real.
Regardless of the increasing likelihood that Armstrong doped, he was a horrible person.. look at how he treated Simeoni.
In road cycling, if something looks too good to be true, then it is. Floyd's stage 17 in 2006, Vino's Stage 13 ITT in 2007 etc etc
Basically I believe Armstrong doped for commensensical reasons, but the lies people will tell to try and frame him just increases the reasonable doubt that maybe he was clean all along.
Well I suspect that's true and it certainly seems from the Balco case that Novitzky isn't adverse to sailing very close to the wind in order to get the evidence he wants/needs though the end result was that the dopers were outed - a good ethical discussion over whether the ends justifies the means on this...
Landis is being supported by Lemond? Try googling 'Landis Lemond hearing'. Now I may be a bit dense at times, but that doesnt seem all that supportive to me...
Things changed between them after Landis admitted to what he'd done/been doing.
he was a horrible person
I quite like the chap! ð
Regardless of the increasing likelihood that Armstrong doped, he was a horrible person.. look at how he treated Simeoni
He had a personal spat with Simeoni.
Do you take prisoners if someone attacks you off the bike?
Oh and Santa does exist to many children around the world.
LA's selfish determination to win & to crush all others before him is admirable but as an individual.. Im not sure I would want to hang with him, I cant help but get the impression that he would always have to have the last word & would always be trying to find new ways to express his Alpha Male status.
Strikes me as being rather insecure..
I have little doubt he doped but the manner in which some are going for him smacks more of jealousy & hatred than any particular desire to "do the right thing". Its a shame because Im sure if there was less vitriol being poured out by his detractors they might find more support & LA would find it harder to get away with some of the stunts he has pulled.
hora - its not just aimed at armstrong its aimed at dopers in general - you may recall lemond had some fun and games with landis and his assistant in court...
But hey Armstrong did lose him a lot of money when he got trek to sever ties with him...
It's already been said but even if he was 'getting assistance', and I would be quite shocked if he wasn't, then all he did was give himself a level playing field. I don't think it detracts from his achievements.
As for "[i]If a court finds that Armstrong won his titles while taking performance-enhancing drugs, his entourage may come to be known as the domestiques of the saddest deception in sports history." ......yeh right [/i] ð
Back in the '90's I got involved with [url= http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexi_Grewal ]Alexi Grewal[/url] on a range of 'enhancement' products aimed at primarily at mtb. It never really did as much as it should have, partly due to Alexi's well document personal problems but also due to the fact that it was legal and after talking to someone heavily involved in 'sports supply' it was obvious that its market was not top level athletes!
Competitive people + driven. Do you think these attributes make the same person lazy/sloppy/happy go lucky outside their sport/etc?
No. Its in their psyche to WIN!
hora, you know nothing
simeoni talked about doping in the peleton, no 'personal attacks' on Armstrong. Armstrong then set about destroying the mans career and livelihood.
TBF, Lance was the one who started the spat.. Simeoni testified against Lance's doctor - was nothing to do with Lance. Lance tried to bully him out of cycling as a result.
Simeoni sued Armstrong for libel. warton if I disagreed with events (papers/media know everything huh?) and then you threatened me with libel I'd probably bop you and put you gently on the floor to recover. ð
Yeah, he sued as Armstrong launched an attack on him, just because he testified in court against his doctor.. c'mon chap it's not that difficult to understand!?
Stop reading googles compressed articles.
Stop reading googles compressed articles.
Whether or not Armstrong is a nice chap is nothing to do with whether he doped or not. I doubt I'd like him personally.
How can someone be tested so often and not be found out? Maybe because he is innocent?
Maybe but IMO unlikely. Hopefully we'll find out one way or another.
How can someone be tested so often and not be found out?
Clever docs, good planning, luck, 'best' available new products......or yes, but less likely, he could be innocent ?
How can someone be tested so often and not be found out? Maybe because he is innocent?
like pantani, ulrich and rasmussen??
Stop reading googles compressed articles.
I watched it live.
Pantanti did fail a 'health check' test but otherwise, valid point. Don't also forget Raimondas Rumšas, tricky Dicky or countless others.
I doubt I'd like him personally.
I imagine hes quite a direct and intense person.
The "he's always tested clean argument" is bogus (even if it were true). The top guys (that can afford it) will be blood doping using transfusions not using chemicals like EPO. If you're a muppet (Vino) you do homologous doping and can get caught, if you're smart you do autologous and it's pretty much undetectable. The only detection is via hematocrit levels (if you're smart you keep just below the permitted limit) or plasticisers (I'm not sure if detection of plasticisers does constitute a failed tested for WADA though).
Personally I still want to know wtf the UCI was playing at regarding Contador and whether there really were plasticisers detected in his sample (it would only make sense for him to have traces of clenbuterol in his blood if he'd done a blood transfer on the rest day).
Biological passports could catch autologous doping but it's extremely difficult to prove something using essentially circumstantial evidence and it looks like the court of human rights could render the biological passport useless.
I used to be a big LA fan but I simply don't believe he did it clean now, especially given the fact the people he was beating have since admitted doping. What I can't understand though is why he made his comeback, presumably he wouldn't be doping now as it would be too much of a risk (even autologus) and his performances don't suggest it either but it shines the spotlight back on him.