BREAKING Report: Lance Abandoning Fight vs Doping Charges, TDF Titles Gone

Mr. Deeds wrote:

Tor, you just don't get it, yes he is guilty but all USADA can do is to keep him from competing whether in cycling or in triathalons. They must now turn their evidence over to the UCI which is the governing body of cycling. They will in turn reveiw the evidence and recommend the punishment or if the titles should be stripped from Armstrong. Even USA cycling in a not very surprising move sided with Armstrong that the case should have final jurisdiction with the UCI. USADA can only make recommendations to the various governing bodies.

Deeds, I realize that this is far from over, but, yes, I think this marks the beginning of the end for the Armstrong myth. With that said, I actually think it's the ASO that controls whether or not the TdF titles are stripped.

Ultimately, UCI has a tough road if they want to keep supporting Lance. After Sparks dismissed Lance's case, the UCI backed down quite a bit. CAS may not hear the case since Lance, in a sense, defaulted by not going to arbitration.

The IOC holds the cards and I don't see them tarnishing the Olympic name for Armstrong. The IOC has previously threatened the UCI to pull them out of the Olympics and I don't see the UCI standing behind Lance.

It's certainly complicated, but the IOC, at minimum, needs the appearance of anti-doping and they will support WADA, who has already shown support for USADA's case against Lance.

The law doesn't DO anything it's just the law. What matters is how it is enforced and interpreted. When we're talking about the USADA, we are not talking about a murder trial, the USADA only needs to show a preponderance of evidence (50%+1).

This is not a kangaroo court it is a American Arbitration Association tribunal. Both parties get to play a role in selecting the (usually 3) arbitrators who will determine the outcome. A list of potential witnesses are discussed with each party at a "preliminary hearing," and all can be cross-examined. There is no game of shadows stuff going on, but the general public does not need to know everything about non-involved parties.

I am certain that LA has received a copy of the 2009 drug test that everyone is talking about, he can show the results were negative and move on. In fact, he could post every negative test he's ever had on a website, if he wanted (look-up Mayweather and Cotto).

So at the end of the day it looks like this. The USADA (for whatever reason) has found all of this evidence which it feels is a prima facie case for cheating and may meet a preponderance. The USADA has filed with the AAA (and, I assume, the ICDR) in accordance with 36 U.S.C. §§ 220501–220529 (2000) a.k.a., the Ted Stevens Olympic and Amateur Sports Act, or something similar. LA could mount a defense with a lawyer provided or use his own, he has chosen not to contest the filing and therefore will not refute the claims of the USADA, the motion for summary judgement will be granted and LA will be stripped of his Olympic medals. The case will be sent to the Union Cycliste Internationale (they have the 2nd worst website ever) and they will determine if he should lose his TdF wins--the Court of Arbitration for Sport in Switzerland will review the case and from there, I'm not sure, but if LA does nothing then it doesn't look good. But I promise you this, if I was innocent and had the resources that LA has, I would fight.

Looks like he makes more $$ as charity than he did with the tour anyways.

http://espn.go.com/olympics/cycling/story/_/id/8301006/lance-armstrong-foundation-sees-78k-donations-25-times-greater-normal-day

There is too much money involved for LA to get too dirty.

This is wrong. The standard in doping cases is neither beyond reasonable doubt nor preponderance of the evidence. The standard is "comfortable satisfaction" It is between those two. There are lots of scholarly articles showing what that means.

The Code defines "comfortable satisfaction" as "greater than a mere balance but less than proof beyond a reasonable doubt."

World Anti-Doping Agency. World Anti-Doping Code. (March 2003): 12 p.

http://www.wada-ama.org/rtecontent/document/code_v3.pdf

Black's Law (6th Ed) defines preponderance as "a standard of proof in

civil cases, is evidence which is of greater weight or more convincing than the

evidence which is offered in opposition to it"; that is, evidence which as a whole

shows that the fact sought to be proved is more probable than not.

The confusion you have may be in that the American legal system is not the only one consulted in the making of the Arbitration rules. That being said many Americans don't understand that it is the duty of the athlete or coach to prove they are not guilty. So it is guilty unless you can prove otherwise...in over simplistic terms.

Your an idiot

How can you compare his ability to fight back during his career vs now? He clearly doesn't have the money to burn in a meaningless lawsuit.

Puddin Pants wrote:

In fact, George Hincapie didn't win the stage to L'Alpe D'Huez, he won the stage to Pla D'Adet. They didn't even use L'Alpe D'huez in 2005. And he won from a breakaway which he sat on the whole stage. Anything else you're not quite remembering right?

Yes you are right but Geroge didn't sit in the whole way. He finished 6 seconds ahead of Pereiro,38 seconds ahead of 3rd place Cacchioli and 57 seconds ahead of the last member of the break 4th place

Boogerd

He finished 14th overall which is pretty good for a guy who also placed 2nd in Paris Roubaix that same year.

George is also thought to be one of the teammates who would testify about the doping on USPS.

anything else you want to dispute?

i am pretty sure i got all the rest right.

Want to talk about Greg strock chris carmichael & Lance

Lance's large donation to the UCI?

Lance & DR Ferrari?

Lance & Lemond?

Maybe Lance reneging on showing his blood values publicly during his comeback?

O.o wrote:

Your an idiot

How can you compare his ability to fight back during his career vs now? He clearly doesn't have the money to burn in a meaningless lawsuit.

Love it when people call others idiots by saying "Your an idiot".

Btw, Lance just gave up the fight which means he may have to pay back his prize money from his 7 TdF wins. That's at least 5 million Euros. Taking this case to arbitration would cost him 10% of that. And he just burned money on a "meaningless lawsuit" claiming he wasn't getting due process.

Yep, somebody's an idiot alright.

for me, if you take personalities out of the equation, you’re left with pee in a cup and blood in a syringe. Armstrong never failed a drug test. He was tested in competition, out of competition. He was tested at the Olympics, at the Tour de France, at dozens if not hundreds of other events. And he never failed a test. We know this because if he had, Travis T. Tygart, the head of USADA, would have personally delivered the results to every home in America, like a grim little Santa Claus.

Instead, Tygart gathered a group of people who swear they saw Armstrong doping. There has been no trial, no due process, but in the minds of many, that testimony outweighs the results of hundreds of drug tests.

ALSO

I don’t know if Armstrong did the things he’s accused of doing, and neither do you. I don’t know if these witnesses are telling the truth, and neither do you. I do know two things: First, he passed all his tests. And second, if he had failed a drug test, and brought in 10 people to testify that they were with him every minute of every day leading up to the test and he never ingested anything, never injected anything, never doped his blood, would we be having this debate today? No, because he would have failed a drug test, and all the testimony in the world wouldn’t matter.

I don't care about Lance, cycling was a druggie fest during his reign (still is?). Even if he competed "fairly" against other dopers, he was still a the lead of a race to the moral bottom.

But Tygert... That guy gives me the creeps. Anyone else catch little whiffs of a man more interested in his own personal gain than supporting the mission of clean-sport? Maybe he and Lance should hang out more, they might have a lot in common. Tygert's rhetoric is more that of a politician (i.e. biased). I would much rather see 10 cheaters go free than one innocent athlete be charged and I am pretty sure that Tygert would do the exact opposite... then run for senate.

*Tygart*

And:

"According to USADA protocol 11(b) The independent “review board” shall be appointed by the USADA’s CEO."

"Mr. Tygart is allowed to handpick the individuals that serve as the “Jury”, and decide if these charges should move forward."

Cash bonuses, non-competitive grants and political clout seem to be most important to Tygart. If I was a professional athlete, I would be working hard to change the leadership at the USADA.

Ralphie! wrote:

*Tygart*

And:

"According to USADA protocol 11(b) The independent “review board” shall be appointed by the USADA’s CEO."

"Mr. Tygart is allowed to handpick the individuals that serve as the “Jury”, and decide if these charges should move forward."

The review board is not like a jury, it is more similar to a grand jury. At this stage of the process, just as in the grand jury process, things are weighted towards the prosecution. However, they don't decide Armstrong's guilty, they only determine if the case moves forward to prosecution.

The actual jury (it is more a bench trial than a jury trial) are the three arbiters. USADA picks one. Lance picks one. The two of them pick a third. Each side gets equal input, which is similar to jury selection.

Why does the man in-charge of the USADA have a passion to to get Lance, especially after a recently completed two year investigation? He should focus his efforts and taxpayer dollars on cleaning up entire leagues, like professional baseball, football, and basketball (do they even have testing requirements?), which he has jurisdiction over.

Be sure and test Roger Clemens! 50 years old and throwing 87mph fastball, seems a little much? Speculation is enough to declare him guilty and make him forfeit all of his personnal awards and make his team forfeit any team awards they won while he was on their roster.

Mid-west crusher wrote:

Why does the man in-charge of the USADA have a passion to to get Lance, especially after a recently completed two year investigation? He should focus his efforts and taxpayer dollars on cleaning up entire leagues, like professional baseball, football, and basketball (do they even have testing requirements?), which he has jurisdiction over.

Be sure and test Roger Clemens! 50 years old and throwing 87mph fastball, seems a little much? Speculation is enough to declare him guilty and make him forfeit all of his personnal awards and make his team forfeit any team awards they won while he was on their roster.

So, the idea here is:

1) It's wrong to go after a single guy (Armstrong) despite the prepnderance of evidence against him; meanwhile,

2) It makes more sense to go after "entire leagues" (collections of individual guys) as this is a better use of taxpayer dollars despite the phenomenally greater expense; but

3) Make sure to go after a *different* single guy (Clemens) and punish everyone in his midst based on speculation alone (I mean, no one who threw in the mid-90s well into his forties could possibly hit 87 now).

Thanks for the wonderful array of coherent suggestions.

Thank you Uncivil Engineer and Tor for perhaps the most inciteful posts- anywhere- on this subject.

Knowing that there will remain millions of Lance hero worshippers within this lifetime, the fact remains Lance's brilliantly conceived, phony fascade received a mortal blow. Any reference to Lance Armstrong will forever prominently note the doping conspiracy uncovered within his mafia-like entourage. And with the many forthcoming books, and the testimony at the various upcoming hearings of Bruynell and Co, its only going to get worse, not better, for Mr. Armstrong's image. Much worse. Armstrong's ability to intimidate is gone forever, and the flood of truth will cascade in waves.

Mid-west crusher wrote:

Why does the man in-charge of the USADA have a passion to to get Lance, especially after a recently completed two year investigation? He should focus his efforts and taxpayer dollars on cleaning up entire leagues, like professional baseball, football, and basketball (do they even have testing requirements?), which he has jurisdiction over.

Be sure and test Roger Clemens! 50 years old and throwing 87mph fastball, seems a little much? Speculation is enough to declare him guilty and make him forfeit all of his personnal awards and make his team forfeit any team awards they won while he was on their roster.

You sound like one of the brainless Armstrong apologists that are littering blogs and message boards across the internet -- all adrenaline, no grey matter. Make sure you add the following to your zombie chant: "he passed 500 tests, it's a witchhunt, can you believe the kangaroo court"...

1. "Why does the man in-charge of USADA have a passion to get Lance?" It's his job to rid sport of drug cheats.

2. "He should focus his efforts and taxpayer dollars on cleaning up entire leagues, like professional baseball, football, and basketball." USADA has control of anti-doping programs for U.S. Olympic, Paralympic, Pan-American and ParaPan American sport. Most professional sport organizations (MLB, NFL, NBA, NHL) internally manage the anti-doping aspects of their sports.

3. "Be sure and test Roger Clemens!" He doesn't have jurisdiction.

bingo jim wrote:

for me, if you take personalities out of the equation, you’re left with pee in a cup and blood in a syringe.

You may have forgot a few things:

- a 1999 backdated prescription for corticosteroid

- blood tests from 2009/2010 that are fully consistent with blood doping

- eye-witness testimony of 10+ former bicyclists, bike mechanic, personal assistant, sponsor rep, close friends, former friends wife

"There has been no trial, no due process," That's why you don't duck arbitration and defend yourself. That is due process.

"I don’t know if Armstrong did the things he’s accused of doing, and neither do you" That's why we would have loved to hear all of the evidence, and likely why Lance didn't want to do the arbitration -- he knew excruciating details from so many witnesses coupled with the 1999 backdated prescription and the 2009/2010 tests would have sealed his fate in the court of public opinion, the only court he figured he could prevail in.

I must say I'm really surprised at the number of Armstrong apologists... message boards and blogs look to be ~70/30 or 80/20 in favor of Armstrong... not sure I would have figured that... weird

Azia wrote:

1. "Why does the man in-charge of USADA have a passion to get Lance?" It's his job to rid sport of drug cheats.

A: Why does the USADA refuse to allow Armstrong to compete in an event where he can be tested using the latest equipment and technology? Because they do not want to be embarrassed by a passed drug test.

2. "He should focus his efforts and taxpayer dollars on cleaning up entire leagues, like professional baseball, football, and basketball." USADA has control of anti-doping programs for U.S. Olympic, Paralympic, Pan-American and ParaPan American sport. Most professional sport organizations (MLB, NFL, NBA, NHL) internally manage the anti-doping aspects of their sports.

A: The USADA does not have full control. They think they do but they just found out they are being challenged to provided documented evidence to the UCI. The USADA cannot hide the results of whatever they have like they though they could.

3. "Be sure and test Roger Clemens!" He doesn't have jurisdiction.

A: But USADA is trying to increase its jurisdiction. The end goal is to be the only testing organization for all drugs in the U.S. Food testing is next on their plate. Trace T. Tygart has already claimed that the reason there are illicit drugs in products is "lax" government regulations. In other words, the U.S. Government agencies, like the Food and Drug Administration, are incapable of performing testing. Only the USADA is capable.