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

Imagine there is a business that employs a team of accountants led by the big stud accountant Larry. They have record profits for 7 years starting in 1999. But early on, say around 2001, questions are raised about whether the books have been manipulated to inflate those profits and conceal the diversion of funds. A number of investigations are conducted over the years by different agencies, and the media get involved as well. All of the accounting team members either indirectly or directly deny any knowledge of fraud for years. But eventually the evidence mounts and various team members are rumored to be changing their story, except for Larry who keeps denying it all. By 2011 a number of the team members are willing to testify that, starting in 1999, they saw or had direct knowledge of Larry embezzling money on multiple occasions.

Here's my question: Are they credible witnesses? After all, by saying they saw the embezzlement they're also admitting that they lied about it (for years in some cases) and took no action to report a clear violation of the rules, despite all the high profile investigations. But on the other hand, the people in the best position to know about criminal behavior tend to also be criminals themselves.

That's the situation we have here with the witnesses to Lance's doping. It really just comes down to whether you feel that someone who has lied and covered up doping for many years is A) no longer believable on that topic period, or B) especially believable if they change their tune and confess. There's really no logical basis to prefer one interpretation over the other - it's just a matter of opinion (about the credibility of the witnesses anyway).

There are two schools of thought among people who have had significant interactions with Lance. Some think he is a doping douche. Others think he is a natural douche.

But everyone agrees about the USADA: they are a bunch of bureaucratic bumblers who flout their own rules about as badly as they accuse Lance of doing, and who wouldn't know due process if someone injected it up their butt.

I'm hardcore antidoping - remember, a number of young cyclists died from it - but at this point I'm honestly not sure who has done more to hurt the cause of clean sport, Lance or the USADA.

I think I'm gonna call it a tie and say that they both SUCK.

examples?

JusSayinSomeStuff wrote:But everyone agrees about the USADA: they are a bunch of bureaucratic bumblers who flout their own rules about as badly as they accuse Lance of doing, and who wouldn't know due process if someone injected it up their butt.

Cam Levins wrote:

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.

What two plot lines do Americans love more than anything else?

1. Underdog makes good

2. The mighty fall from grace

Look at every American sports movie ever made.

Lance lived part one after cancer. Inevitable that he's going to live part two.

Wow, Rojo, that you refer to the above drivel as post of the year is deeply disappointing. How can you maintain such a simple-minded view on this issue? It is sad to think that with you at the helm of an information source that many people (myself included) visit on a daily basis, your narrow view is the lens and filter through which many people will consume the daily media/issues. First off, and this will upset many people, it is complete idiocy to make this issue about whether or not Lance doped. OBVIOUSLY LANCE DOPED! AS DID MOST TOP RIDERS IN THAT ERA! Does that mean that doping is OK? OBVIOUSLY IT DOES NOT! The issue here is NOT about whether doping is ok and whether or not Lance doped - the real issue here is that an athlete who accomplished arguably more than any other sportsperson in history in any sport, an individual who outside of sport contributes greatly to cancer awareness and research, and a man who has changed the face of the struggling sport of cycling forever is being hung out to dry many years after the fact and without ever recording a positive drug test. Of course he is giving up the fight...it is the only card he has left to play that saves face, not just for him but also for the sport of cycling and the millions of people who believed in him and drew hope from his story. This is not a black and white, good vs evil issue here - and it depresses me to see such an utter lack of compassion and humility from so many people.

Mr. Obvious wrote:

Yeah, mine was the abbreviated version, but I pretty much nailed it. If I had made it into a drinking game I'd be hammered;

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/lance-armstrongs-full-statement-on-usada-ban

+1

LOL

gonchar wrote:

Come on Brooklyn. Lets cut the nonsense.

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.

He's guilty as hell.

+2

Captain VG wrote:

The bottom line is that an innocent man never stops fighting for his innocence. The US is not Nazi Germany and the USADA is not the Gestapo.

try telling that to Julian Assange

Too damned funny, and a nice illustration of the muddled mindset of the average sports fan, or at least the average track and field fan.

The general consensus on this board is that pretty much every true standout is doped. Someone has a breakout season at 28? Juiced. Someone busts a PR while looking more ripped than ever? It's not the improved diet and training, it's the juice. And all throughout, people blare confidently that USATF, abetted by USADA, is covering up dirty urines to protect its stars.

Now, when a luminary like none other is caught and facing severe sanctions -- someone almost everyone seems to think was doping all along -- USADA is accused of malice, or perpetrating a witch hunt. And not just by people who think Armstrong was clean, but by people who agree that he was dirty. "Everyone else in cycling is juiced," they complain, expecting USADA to turn a blind eye on the basis of that old standby -- "everyone's doing it!"

So, do people want a clean sport or not? Or are some people simply untouchable on the basis of their accomplishments, or because they overcame a serious illness, or because they do charitable work, or because dammit, they're American?

This kind of schizoid, double-bladed approach isn't limited to sports fandom -- we see it when celebrities and politicians fall on their faces -- but it's perhaps no more stark anywhere than it is in the arena of human physical competition.

People have a need to demonize someone that trumps their willingness to celebrate reality.

Really "Coach d," you REALLY think Lance should hire a "hit man" ?

Are you an idiot, a sociopath, or a psychopath. Which of the 3 are you? I mean really dude, what world do you live in?

What a stupid comment. Makes you think you are cool? Pathetic.

What Lance should do is find a sympathetic Billionaire (Mark Cuban type) and go after USADA, and tear down sham process.

Or he could just appeal to the CAS like LaShawn Merritt and others have done.

Of course that might mean that all the evidence would become public.

I can't say for sure whether Lance doped or not. I do know he has been fighting allegations for a long time. He is crazy rich and has better things to do with his time than continue to meet with lawyers and sit through long winded arbitrations, again.

We all know who won those 7 titles.

Rainy day wrote:

We all know who won those 7 titles.

Dr. Michele Ferrari?

Lance Armstrong took PEDs. So did every other rider who competed in the same era as Armstrong. Does that make it right or legal? Of course not. But apples to apples, Lance Armstrong was the greatest cyclist of all time.

All things being equal - even had all the riders been clean - Lance would have kicked the crap out of them all. There is no doubt; that fact cannot be disputed.

Best cyclist or best responder?

There is no way of knowing who would have been the best if everyone was clean.

Does anyone know why they are imposing a lifetime ban? I don't know what penalties are normally imposed in cycling, but I am quite sure Floyd Landis and others were not given lifetime bans. Is it because Armstrong is presumed to have used PEDs in all seven Tour wins? Thanks.

johan bruyneel wrote:

Correct me if I'm wrong here.

Johan Bruyneel is fighting the charges. Won't a lot of the evidence against Lance be brought forward for all of us to see because of this?

If Bruyneel continues to contest his arbitration, and if he requests that arbitration is public, then we will see all of the evidence against Lance.

If one of those things is not the case than USADA can still release some of their evidence in their findings letter but it will be in summary form.

comment on the guardian by JoshRogan:24 August 2012 6:56AMWhite American male cyclist: 7, SEVEN victories in one of the word's toughest sports over a Peloton of undoubted dopers = Blue-eyed saint who is being persecuted by cynics and French drug busters.Young Chinese female swimmer: 1, ONE Olympic gold (at the time) = GUILTY of doping, case closed.

Y'all sound like a bunch of barking dogs at dog pound in heat over one chihuahua (the topic). LA doesn't haven't to respond it's a waste of energy and time. The USADA is a rouge organization with no authority.

Now she's afraid to come out of the water

And I wonder what she's gonna do

Now she's afraid to come out of the water

And the poor little girl's turning blue

Two thee four tell the people what she wore

It was an Itsy Bitsy Teenie Weenie Yellow Polka Dot Bikini

That she wore for the first time today

An Itsy Bitsy Teenie Weenie Yellow Polka Dot Bikini

So in the water, she wanted to stay

From the Locker to the blanket

From the blanket to the shore

From the shore to the water

Guess there isnt any more