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.

Slightly OT, but just to address TJ’s points about charities. Yes, they are pretty much all profit making bodies. They have to be in order that they can pay salaries to the best employees they can get – much like any other business.

Which is why it boils my piss when I get phone calls asking me to shoot charity events for free because “…we’re a charititable organisation”. Does the marketing director work for ‘exposure’? No? then get tae Frunce.

As you were…

Why dont we wait to see if he IS actually charged and convicted before slagging him off?

If he is it’ll be a sad but fair day. Otherwise park the venom.

I only know a little about gas/liquid chromatography and detection of molecules but from the little I do know I can see how a clever chemist can hide certain molecules behind the normal signature of the body’s chemistry. Detection methods always lag a few years behind the creation of molecules and it’s only a matter of time before scientific evidence becomes available.

I wonder who the witnesses are?

charities should IMO be assessed on their efficiency – of every £ donated how many p actually reach the charity recipients and how much gets absorbed in costs.

I feel the same about the NHS. 😕

There is a quite high probability that he cheated, the question is whether or not there is any value in spending the money to prove it.

Who should be awarded his 7 yellow jerseys?
What is the benefit to Cycling?
What is the benefit to anyone really?

It was an era where apparently the guys in the top 10 at the tour were doped, let’s move on.

Cancellara – clean as fooking whistle. Been awesome all way through his career with steady development from his start with mapai and fassa to the awesome rider he is now.

So something similar to Armstrong who was World Road Race Champion long before he ever rode the Tour.

Er ……no. Armstrong’s palmares pre cancer was wholly incomparable to Fabu’s. World’s aside ( a win that really endured him to the cycling world (not) and is always a lottery – good ride that it was) and Tours and LA has won FW and San Seb. Thats it !! (and he rode tour 18 months after winning Worlds)

Fabu could barely finish the classics when he was 21 but slowly got better. MSR, E3, Flanders, Roubaix. The two riders couldnt be more different.

has cancellara won Fleche Wallone ???
Dont think so.
Or do you mean Mur de Grammont in Flanders ??
Yeh, different Mu(u)r, same phenomenon – esp as he rode Boonen off his wheel and made him look about as slow as me

Couldnt be more different. Have you seen Fleche. Armstrong (as did Vandenbrouke) destroyed a ‘charged’ field up the final climb in a ridiculous gear and a ‘look at me fashion’. Cancellara was favourite to win Flanders (his speciality) and simlply attacked Boonen (who was struggling that season)where nearly every rider who wins flanders attacks. Sat down in a big gear but then again he has only been World time trial champ 4 years on the bounce so may know something about turning a gear.

I wonder who the witnesses are?

I imagine the same bloke who dragged TDF through the courts then when he lost admitted he did dope. Twisted ****.

So the Feds investigate for two years, clear and then these folk allege. .

I wonder who the witnesses are?

Well big George has just announced his retirement

It is fairly well accepted that most if not all pro cyclists were doping during LA’s career. LA has managed to beat any charges through out his career whilst others did not. I’m not sure what finding him guilty would achieve for the sport today. Surely it would be better to concentrate of making sure the sport is clean from now on.

edgar allen poe?

nice!

. 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.

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?

a copy of the very damming interview with micheal asenden for anyone interested – just a part of the evidence.

http://martin.criminale.com/2010/08/michael-ashenden-interview-regarding.html

I jut hope the folk doing this actually have some proof.

Does it REALLY matter?

I’m sure that eventually in the BIGGER picture, the karmic blade will swing and at some point in time and space balance will be restored.

If LA has been so self-centred then next time around his soul shall experience the alternative and vice-versa.

The truth is out there and if any of us are meant to know it, we shall. But possibly not in this lifetime.

Have a great day everyone 😀

Why dont we wait to see if he IS actually charged and convicted before slagging him off?

Come on Mark, this is STW…guilty until proven innocent. 🙄

Why dont we wait to see if he IS actually charged and convicted before slagging him off?

Because even if the verdict is ‘not guilty’, the same people will just vomit up the same nonsense about ‘there is evidence, just not enough to convict him’ etc etc

Personally, I couldn’t give a monkeys either way. He’s just a guy who races bikes and was quite successful. Cycling’s just a bit of competition & entertainment. Nothing of any real significance in the scheme of things.

Much like my opinion, & everyone elses on here.

However, Lance Armstrong threads are the only ones to give Religion/God threads a good run for their money on STW 😀

However, Lance Armstrong threads are the only ones to give Religion/God threads a good run for their money on STW

What about if we turn this in to a Lance / Helmet thread crossover?
Those glasses won’t save your life fella.

I used to be an Armstrong fan, I hoped he did not dope and that all the naysayers were wrong.
Having read much on the subject I now don’t believe he can be and am saddened by that. However it would appear many of the people he raced against almost certainly did as well so that just about clears the what about the pour innocent he beat arguement.

The damage caused by doping has hit those a little lower down the foodchain, all the not quite there riders who doped and have probably done their health and certainly their bank balances no good… but were they were more successful than they would have been without doping?
The Omerta is the biggest problem, would I want my kids to try to be a professional cyclist when I knew there was a chance that not only would they be expected to dope and would suffer badly if they broke the “law of silence”? No, not a chance on either count.
Breaking that stupid code – of which Armstong appears to have been the biggest enforcer (almost certainly because he had something to hide) should be one of the primary goals along with stopping all transfusions, doping etc.

I have a Livestong baseball hat, because I needed one & thought the money was going to a good cause.
I still wear it because it is my most comfortable hat but if chatting to a cyclist while wearing it I do feel just a little bit dirty – thats not right either & I would have preferred that more of my money had gone to a good cause.

Does chasing him through the courts and stripping him of his titles do any good? Probably not, certainly it makes my mates who know nothing about the subject take the micky because its in the news and keep them thinking cycling is dirty when I am sure that all most all,if not all pro sports are the same.

Sue him, send him to jail for lying to the feds but leave the titles on the basis that what happened happened and, as said above, how far down the results order would they have to go to find a clean rider & even then, how could they be sure?

Not proven TeeJ. Never tested positive TeeJ. All the others have TeeJ. Most tested man in world sport during his cycling career TeeJ. Where’s your proof TeeJ (other than the articles people with an agenda have written)? Are you French TeeJ?

WunUndred 😀

DD

Which is why I carefully said evidence not proof

There is a mountain of evidence – and I love the way you describe Ashenden as a man with an agenda. One of the worlds top experts on doping. Evidence ranging from sworn testimony of loads of folk to the evidence of failed retrospective testing to the evidence on his blood passport etc etc

You want to believe he is clean – up to you.

Many folk now known to have doped never tested positive, he is not the most tested athlete in the world.

Look at it from a level playing field.

Even if ALL of them were smacked up to their tits in those Amstrong Tours.

Even on a level playing field his achievements are awesome.

Now shut up. The Feds investigation had witnesses etc etc and rolled on for two years. At the beginning of that the same STW’ers banged on with their righteousness. funnily when it ended the same didn’t say ‘ah they didn’t convict him’. Funny that. I wonder how many young STW’ers are joining or is it an ageing democraphic of bitter men?

Why does it matter???

He’s still competing and beating clean athletes, that’s why it matters. I suspect a certain B Wiggins thinks it matters quite a lot. He’d have been on the podium in 2009 if it wasn’t for that cheating piece of scum.

You want to believe he is clean – up to you.

When did I say that?

I’m just saying that it hasn’t been proven…and let’s be honest, it probably never will. You’d believe a turd if it came up with something damning on him – because you have chosen long ago to believe he doped.

I’m French so I guess that I can say he’s guilty 😀

For me, the evidence, be it circumstancial or not, is enough for me to believe that he doped. That said, he should be ‘prosecuted’ fairly and if the evidence isn’t sufficiently robust then he shouldn’t be convicted.

As it goes, for me the (alleged) threatening and manipulation of people to keep his secrets is what I would like to see him pay the price for as that’s what I think has done the most damage to cycling.

circumstancial

alleged

😐

Aside from the whole Lance thing, I’d say it still matters now as it demonstrates that you stand a good chance of being caught for doping, even if only retrospectively.

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.”

Well Said, in total agreement with you there

Heres a non-cycling mag agenda reported:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/othersports/cycling/9330996/Lance-Armstrong-given-a-week-to-answer-US-Anti-Doping-Agency-charges-against-Tour-de-France-winner.html#

perhpas if he is found guilty it wouls also be a rather strong anti doping message? “we will catch you one day” and “no one is too big”?

I find this a very strange attitude that it would be bad for the sport to catch and punish a cheat

why do they always announce these allegations two weeks befor the tour – that then end up in court for years..

Why don’t they go after some footballers and the pathetic sanctions they are given, let alone the non existent level of testing.

deadlydarcy – Member

circumstancial or not

alleged may or may not be true

As I said, let’s see what actually gets thrown up. We’ve no idea who or what has been provided as witness statements from the other riders.

Its funny how some of the proven cheats bring out books after they are convicted. I suppose if you add thé name of the most well known cyclist then you’ll sell xxxxx number of extra copies.

If he is convicted then the general public will just see cycling as à cheaters sport. I
Just dont understand the general attitude

let’s see what actually gets thrown up

Ah right, just read like you’d made your mind up already; based on circumstantial evidence and allegations.

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.

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.

Go and read the Kimmage-Landis article:

Landis/Kimmage

Go and read LA Confidentiel:

Go and read about Betsy Andreu:

http://www.velonation.com/News/ID/5699/Betsy-Andreu-speaks-about-Lance-Armstrongs-involvement-in-the-Floyd-Landis-investigation.aspx

Go read about Emma O’Reilly, being hassled for 2 years by LA:

http://bicycling.com/blogs/theselection/2011/04/27/emma-o%E2%80%99reilly-responds-to-strickland%E2%80%99s-%E2%80%9Cendgame%E2%80%9D/

…to let this go, to pretend it’s all ok is bad for cycling.

I love pro cycling, but like sausages, I don’t really enjoy knowing how it’s made.

clubber – Member

I’m French so I guess that I can say he’s guilty
😆
I am too and I watch with interest. 😀

Scweiz, I have some 2.3″ hookworms on that bike now, it still pedals like poo, but it corners like a scalextric car now 8)

Technicalities are the fundamentals of law. You can’t convict on a hunch, so bearing that in mind LA MUST be assumed to be innocent till proven otherwise.

On the other hand..if he was doping, he was still the best cyclist on the Tour as he beat all the others (who as has been said on this thread already were probably doping anyway, certainly some of those he beat have been convicted).

But this is where it gets confusing. His charity work. There’s no doubt he’s raised awareness for cancer & a lot of money too. BUT there’s also a very convincing argument that his foundation hasn’t been much more than a tax-exercise for LA. I’ve read some very compelling arguments suggesting so..

To sum up, I think he probably was a a doper ( althought I truly hope not) but it flies in the face of evidence as doping was/is endemic in pro- cycling. BUT he was still probably the fastest on the Tour with or without drugs. As for the foundation? I believe thats bona fide.

Personally I hope he’s not convicted, the World needs heroes & sometimes the ones we get are the oes we deserve.

There, how’s that for a bit of fence sitting? 😉

If he is convicted then the general public will just see cycling as à cheaters sport.

I believe they already do.
And broadly speaking I think they’re right.

He was right in one sense; its not about the bike…