He'll get to keep his NY Marathon Finishers medal won't he?
He'll get to keep his NY Marathon Finishers medal won't he?
Lol u hella dumb blood wrote:
This is literally the worst thing that could happen. Brilliant douche move by Lance because he knows they would have proven his guilt but this way he can claim that he just got tired of fighting the charges. What a joke.
Yeah because Lance has unlimited financial resources to keep paying legal fees and on top of unlimited time to see them in court after, hm how many years? About ten at least. How is every other doper who is accused of cheating is caught within a couple years, sometimes a couple months, but yet Lance, the most tested athlete out there in the history of any sport was never, caught, once, in roughly ten years worth of testing? The man was never, I repeat NEVER, proven guilty of using PED's.
I can't more disagree with this. How can we trust testimony when we know all of those individuals testifying against Lance are only doing so under the punishment of prison time? If they didn't testify what USADA wanted to hear, they have a 50% chance of being be put in jail, dependent on the result of the trial. If they say what the USADA wants to hear, regardless of the trial's outcome, they are scott free. Why would those 10 people, if they were rational, not agree to just say whatever USADA wanted?
I am not arguing that Lance was clean. I am arguing that his clean/not clean doesn't matter in this case. And it doesn't matter whether USADA had evidence or not. Lance was going to be found guilty, by a government agency strong-arming testimony against him.
We are all still owed hard evidence from USADA about the lance case. They have spent 2 years of tax dollars attempting to win themselves legitimacy as an organization and a little bit of fame. They should show what evidence they have-hard evidence, not forced testimony-from 2 years of research.
"No competitor with an ego like Lance just gives up and caves in- unless he is about to be nailed by dozens of respected colleagues, teammates, coaches, physios, etc. Nope, if you've been wronged, you fight. You fight to the death."
dudewheresmycar wrote: We are all still owed hard evidence from USADA about the lance case. They have spent 2 years of tax dollars attempting to win themselves legitimacy as an organization and a little bit of fame.
The USADA operates on grants. I expect that the USADA cuts it's own throat this time. Not that the USADA CEO, Travis Tygert, cares. He already has the future planned out, and it won't be continuing to run the USADA. He is pretty much dead on the job.
If anyone is still enamored with the whole "Lance would never dope because he had cancer and is concerned for his health" thing:
Guess what? It's the 21st century. Cancer sucks, but athlete-survives-cancer-and-wins-Tour-de-France stories sell like crazy.
Good. Now we don't have to watch people assassinate Hincapie's character after he testifies against Lance in arbitration hearings. Lance defenders always find an excuse. If just about everyone close to him testified to his drug use, the defenders would still say - "oh, they just want to make money by defaming Lance," or some other nonsense.
There have been numerous cases in which people admitted to crimes they never committed due partly to aggressive police pressure to admit. I could post links to numerous cases but this is Letsrun and frankly none of you deserve that much effort on my part to prove that point. Go google it.
The insane thing is not only was Lance mercilessly tested more times and for a longer period than anyone in the sport and yet never got caught doping. Also accusations mean nothing without concrete evidence to support claims, that's why we have trials.
They had their numerous trials and legal battles and basically came up with nothing and the only thing they could hope for which they got was for Lance to concede after an insanely long time of legal battles. Time and money is something he does not have infinitely have and he was bound to give up eventually.
I'm sorry, maybe he doped, possibly considering how dominate he was but also remember the man went through cancer and chemo treatment which I believe had the most performance enhancing effect on him. Often when the body is damaged, once healed it is MUCH stronger and durable than it was before. This is why boxers' fists are so strong and their face tissue can handle high impact collisions that would normally kill the average person. The damage and healing process they endure through their career builds up its immense tolerance. But I digress.
Fact is, if they would've gotten proof of him cheating they would've got it by now. I mean how is it that ALL the athletes, doctors, close friends and family, drug testing boards who would surely have something on Lance as a cheater never came forward with hard and concrete evidence after all these years? That's a lot of people to keep on a short leash.
Anyways, I think Lance explains it best.
http://lancearmstrong.com/news-events/lance-armstongs-statement-of-august-23-2012
P.S. Happy Bday Kobe Bryant
I really don't get this.
If we have any athlete that excels, we have to assume that athlete is cheating? That takes away from the enjoyment of the sport, doesn't it?
I am not necessarily saying Armstrong wasn't doping, I am merely querying.
deny, deny, deny wrote:
I claim I saw Rojo doping. I have 10 fellow competitors who hate Rojo and who will also claim they Rojo doping.
Rojo deserves to hang because, well because, he always beat us in races and that is humanely not possible unless he was a doper.
Rojo, deny, deny, deny. You are guilty in the eyes of your competitors.
Except that Rojo never won anything, and there are not, in fact, 10 people claiming to have seen him doping. Therefore, your analogy is meaningless.
Besides, it is not *just* eyewitness testimoney that the USADA is using here -- the testimony is being used *in conjunction with* chemical evidence, the exact nature of which has not been released yet (and may never be -- likely the reason Armstrong threw in the towel).
Americans are idiots.
You guys crucify one of your greatest international endurance athletes, and high five yourselves over it.
I'm sure that this will not make you guys look like fools on the world stage at all, especially since the guys that finished second to Lance those years were TOTALLY not doping right?
I bet there will be a lot of baffled amusement from the European cycling scene, wondering why America would willingly sacrifice it's own champion.
+1
dudewheresmycar wrote:
we know all of those individuals testifying against Lance are only doing so under the punishment of prison time?
"We" don't know any such thing. "I" call bullshit on the statement "you" made above. You don't even know who these ten people are. Neither do I, but any one of them could easily say that they never saw Lance take anything and if Lance was later determined to be dirty (I won't say "guilty" because the USADA is not a court of law), it would make no difference in terms of legal consequences to those who claimed to have no knowledge of Armstrong's shenanigans.
someone had to do it wrote:
Random lake wrote:He was not caught at the time with the best test methods then available. He is still and always be a champion in my eyes.
thats cool
it just means you're a retard though
LOL! He is a retard!
Uncivil Engineer wrote: Except that Rojo never won anything, and there are not, in fact, 10 people claiming to have seen him doping. Therefore, your analogy is meaningless.
For an engineer you seem to have skipped the logic classes.
Rojo did not finish DFL in races. There are people he beat, some, like me, he always beat.
The USADA claiming they have 10 "credible" witnesses is a perfect analog to my claim I have 10 "credible" witnesses.
Engineers don't have to take logic classes, although I happened to fulfill part of my liberal arts requirements by taking Philosophy of Logic.
deny, deny, deny wrote:
The USADA claiming they have 10 "credible" witnesses is a perfect analog to my claim I have 10 "credible" witnesses.
*Sigh*
No. Rojo did not travel with an entourage of coaches, teammates, doctors, etc. Lance did, and many of those people were doing the same illicit things he was. Rojo was never in that situation. Just because he beat you and won some races doesn't mean he had nearly the internal visibility of Armstrong. And he wasn't at a level where doping is not only de rigueur, but virtually obligatory.
You may not be willing to acknowledge the differences, but they exist, your clumsy oversimplifying notwithstanding.
Brooklyn George wrote:
Epo, the blood doping drug used by cyclists, is intended for use by chemo therapy patients to increase red blood cell count. So obviously, Lance Armstrong, a cancer survivor, should be given a little leniency here. Is is an unfair advantage or does it allow him to perform up to his natural abilities? I say the latter
This is a very interesting point that most people are unaware of; however, it would only address his first TDF victory.
I for one don't think the guy needs to surrender his titles. Those attacks in the mountains and the speed in the time-trialing were real and he won them all in dominating fashion. That said, it amazes me that people can't understand how doping works in a sport like cycling. Lance, or any of the other riders, don't just sit around and one day decide to up their game with some pharmaceuticals. It is systemic to the sport. A promising young rider doesn't get a contract offer to a Tour team without being thoroughly vetted that he's on board and not likely to be a liability to the rest of the team and all the people involved in the shoe.
The managers, coaches, doctors (literally hundreds of people sport-wide) - these people are all plainly aware of the performance possibilities of an athlete training with performance enhancers, many have been studying the data for decades, their entire careers. They not only know the significant benefits of PEDs, they know that the management teams of each of their competitors has this date too. It is a classic prisoners' dilemma with millions of $$$ and long careers as spoils to the victors. These are the people calling the shots day-to-day, not some 25yr old rider.
Uncivil Engineer wrote:
Jesus Christ. There's a guy named Frank Schleck who finished 6th, 5th, and 3rd in 2008, 2009, and 2011 respectively and was disqualified from the race each time. Why the hell was he even allowed into the race after two positive tests AT le Tour itself? Or even the year after flunking his first test?
I could be wrong, but I think that chart is a little misleading and he was never DQ'd from those races. He *was* just asked to leave the 2012 race midway through after testing for a diuretic. I think all the entries with his name highlighted as a DQ for the prior years stem from that.
This Lance thing leaves me entirely unsatisfied. I think he's a giant douchebag. I'm actually not that eager to strip his titles (who deserves them??) but his constant sanctimony as Rojo says, has been too much. I was kind of looking forward to seeing all of his closest teammates testify against him, but he's depriving me of that opportunity with his "I'll just choose to ignore it/I don't care/People still love me and will continue to stroke my ego" stance.
Haha - involved in the "show"
Seriously though, I don't know why Armstrong can't be seen as both the most dominant rider of his era and a product of his sport. It doesn't need to be zero-sum.
"The toll this has taken on my family, and my work for our foundation and on me leads me to where I am today . . . "
Amazing that under all this legal hullabaloo and turmoil he has had to endure defending his reputation, he has only managed to complete numerous Ironmen, Half-Ironmen, marathons, bike races, and even within the last week or so, to win the Steamboat Springs trail marathon.
God this has taken a toll on him! It must be debilitating to be under so much stress and only be able to manage to train endlessly each and every day for hours and hours in order to compete in all those endurance events! What a horrific life the USADA people have subjected him to!