Lawyers please read the quote of the day from Tim Herman and tell us who you think will win the Lance Armstrong lawsuit

It's not denial if I'm correct. And, according to you, I am correct. 99% is not all. Regarding your claim that it's well documented and collaborated, is it really? Or is it all just speculation and opinion?

Those that think that doping in cycling has nothing to do with running and other sports, either have their head in the sand, or have not been following the news very closely. In Spain there is the ongoing case of Doctor Eufemiano Fuentes, who had provided cyclists with EPO, steroids and other drugs and had 186 blood bags belonging to professional athletes and marked with coded names.

Fuentes said (of the blood bags), "It could be a cyclist in a cycling team, a footballer in a football team, an athlete, a boxer,” he has said. But then he went further, claiming: “I could identify all the samples. If you give me a list I could tell you who corresponds to each code on the packs.” However, it appears that under the terms of the investigation, the judge will not require him to reveal any of the names, other than than the cyclists implicated.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/othersports/cycling/9836906/Spanish-doctor-Eufemiano-Fuentes-told-he-does-not-have-reveal-athletes-he-treated-in-doping-inquiry.html

The Lance connection?

Tyler Hamilton paid more than 50,000 USD to Fuentes between 2002 and 2004 and is to give evidence in the case against Fuentes.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2013/jan/29/operation-puerto-doctor-footballers-fuentes

Regarding the debate about the percentages, I believe Hamilton also said that cycling was 80% doped during the time he was riding.

I believe Hamilton also said that cycling was 80% doped during the time he was riding

So which is it 99% or 80%? Or some other made up number?

Unless someone can come up with a source for the 99% claim, I'd be more inclined to believe Hamilton's 80% estimate: "Back in 1997 when I first started doping I believe 80 percent of the peloton was doping to some degree".

http://www1.skysports.com/cycling/news/12040/8289795/Sky-Sports-quizzes-Tyler-Hamilton-on-Lance-Armstrong-Bradley-Wiggins-and-Tour-de-France-doping

If Hamilton thought it was 99%, why not say it was 99%?

Then he could claim "everyone was doing it".

I'd be interested to find out on what basis (in terms of solid proof) Hamilton was making that claim, because even with the laissez-faire attitude to doping that seems to have permeated the sport (right from the UCI on down), I doubt many people were running around the hotels with needles in their veins or nipping to the next door bus to borrow a phial of EPO.

Just to put the 80% figure into perspective, in the TdF peloton Hamilton would have had to observe 149 other riders (22 teams of 9 minus US Postal's 9, because he already knew about them) doping - unlikely to say the least!

Hamilton is entitled to his opinion, but the figure given smacks of an attempt to justify his actions (and by extension those of Lance Armstrong).

Hamilton also fails to define "doping" - I'd categorise the use of a cortizone cream (for example) in a lower category of "doping" than microdosing EPO.

For his figure of 80% to be correct he'd have to be amalgamating all the "categories" of doping into one, and therefore attempting to smear the cortizone cream user with the same brush that has been used to tar him.

rojo wrote:

See the QOD on the HP. It's pretty interesting from a legal perspective.

.

Would it of really been that hard to put the quote in your post to avoid unnecessary internet travel? I hate people like you.

A Duck wrote:

We all lose.

This website is not called "Let's Cycle.com"

The consensus is, we're all tired of the Lance Stories.

Cover RUNNING and Track and Field.

Duh.

A bit of reciprocation going on perhaps?

Cyclingnews.com forums: Cycling - At least it's not distance running

GenericID wrote:

I'd be interested to find out on what basis (in terms of solid proof) Hamilton was making that claim,...

If you're really interested you could ask him:

long sox wrote:

Those that think that doping in cycling has nothing to do with running and other sports, either have their head in the sand, or have not been following the news very closely.

Lance would seem to agree you, and he would know, "...to be frank it's about ALL endurance sports.".

And to state the obvious, which seems necessary here at times:

Endurance Cycling = Endurance Sport - Endurance Running = Endurance Sport.