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

I view this as a victory for drugs. More proof that they work and are undetectable. USADA can continue their witch hunts but legalisation is the only way to go.

Right now science favours the dopers and I don't see that changing any time soon. The staements WADA put out about improved testing are little more than limp propaganda. They're so far behind they're about to be passed twice.

coach d wrote:

Unless you have to go through an "arbitration process" where court is hand-picked by the prosecutor, you have no right to see the evidence against you, and your rights are less than what they would have been in the Soviet Union.

Bullshit, the defendant chooses on arbitrator and agrres on the third. That makes it a 50% stake in the the selection of the arbitrators.

And it has been part of the federal hearing that the defendant will get all evidence early enough to prepare for defense.

You are a spinster.

I believe him to be guilty. But he says that he passed hundreds of doping tests - and apparently that is true also. The implication is that the testing regime has fallen short, is falling short. Despite years of struggle the sports establishment has failed. The performance yardsticks and championships are rotten that we use to bestow honor and wealth in sports. There is no such thing as an untainted world record, World Series or Tour championship, Olympic medal. We have to admit this to ourselves, this thing that we really don't want to believe, and find some way to find meaning in sports other than through the cult of celebrity that glamorizes these tainted acts.

The thing that surprises me about Armstrong's positive tests is that I always assumed he was actually a robot created by the United States just to piss off and embarrass the French. I guess its engineers had it put banned substances in itself just to mimic the behavior of its human peers, and now the shit's hit the fan.

As I said in 2010 as the federal investigation (which was dropped in February) was heating up:

Did Lance "cheat"? Probably, at least at some point. I mean you can't really think of a competitive cyclist from his time that didn't, and at that level, if everyone is getting an extra edge there's no way to keep up without it. The simple logic is that he never got caught: if anyone was clean, it was him. The conspiracy theories that he had some magical drug that nobody else had and that was undetectable for a decade is ridiculous. He's an athlete, not a mad scientist.

These are the things that are clear: while others were testing positive, he never got caught. If he cheated, than likely, so did everyone else, and he still dominated the sport for nearly a decade. Why did he dominate? No other cyclist of his time had the talent coupled with the motivation to focus an entire team's energy on winning one single race each year. Nobody at the time had the same level of sophistication in engineering and training technology, and he got lucky as hell to never have a bad fall or bonk in 15000 miles of tour riding when he won his 7 straight.

An investigation led by a proven cheater to try establish that someone else, years in the past, also cheated, is a complete waste of time. It would be even be funny if it wasn't going to cost millions of dollars. The sport has moved on and cleaned up, but rather than be able to focus on that, and the new generation of great riders, the attention is shifted toward old accusations. Lance is a great champion and a philanthropist and should be recognized as such. The doubters have had a decade to prove that he gained an unfair advantage in becoming the greatest tour rider in history, and have failed to do so. The sport should be allowed to move on without people like Landis, who actually did test positive, pulling it back into the mud.

What this tells me for sure is that USADA is a joke.

Basically, if we can't catch you in the act with science, we'll come after you later with hearsay testimony and make your life a living hell. They assumed he was guilty from the get go and found a way to make it stick. Sort of like Bush's WMD "evidence".

nothing has changed wrote:

Nobody at the time had the same level of sophistication in engineering and training technology

The sport should be allowed to move on without people like Landis, who actually did test positive, pulling it back into the mud.

how about "nobody at the time had the same level of drug protocols, drug quality, and drug availability"?

i think the sport should move on without lance armstrong. he's the one that can stop all this mess and just admit to it. he's the cause of this.

All the info will come out.

VN=velonews

TT=Travis Tygart

"VN: There was reportedly a lot of evidence in the case, there was witness testimony and presumably more…do you expect any of those details to emerge?

TT: Yes, absolutely…at the right time. Obviously there are other cases that are alleged to be involved in the conspiracy. Their cases are still proceeding, so it will be in due course.

VN: So there is no impediment to USADA releasing the evidence?

TT: No, no. "

From this statement it appears that UCI will recognize USADA's sanctioning (note: they kind of have to if they want to stay in the Olympics).

http://www.uci.ch/Modules/ENews/ENewsDetails.asp?id=ODYzOA&MenuId=MTI2Mjc

Not to be negative, but... wrote:

Basically, if we can't catch you in the act with science, we'll come after you later with hearsay testimony and make your life a living hell. They assumed he was guilty from the get go and found a way to make it stick. Sort of like Bush's WMD "evidence".

You have no idea what hearsay is, do you?

You will look very foolish when the evidence comes out.

RuKiddingMe!! wrote:

The Media has become our bible of information........letting the media win our hearts and minds in so many issues.....so sad.

So, the media compelled USADA to undertake a years-long investigation of Armstrong, and the USADA, though reluctant to do its job, was forced to comply? That's one view, I guess.

Alanson wrote:

he says that he passed hundreds of doping tests - and apparently that is true also.

And also apparently flunked a few. Look, if I drive below a .08 alcohol level 99 times out of 100, that won't excuse me from a DUI if I blow a .25 on the one exceptional trip.

I know what hearsay is, and I know it doesn't exactly fit this case.

Whatever "evidence" they have will be the same trumped up crap we always hear about. Someone found a blood transfusion bag in the trash at a hotel in France in 2005. The team stayed there. Ergo, they were blood doping....right? Or someone saw Lance getting injected with something. That someone was a doper (let's say, Hamilton). So Hamilton assumes whatever Lance got was the same thing Hamilton got. Guilty!

What I want are test results, documents, invoices....REAL evidence. Not the crap that they roll out that has a bunch of reasonable doubt associated with it.

Look, I don't really care if Armstrong did it or not -- I think he probably did. But he passed all the damn tests, and he's retired. This is nothing more than a personal vendetta by USADA.

After days of interrogation, sleep deprivation, coercion, and torture, the "Guildford Four" confessed to IRA bombings they didn't do. They went to prison based on these confessions (later retracted), false accusations, and anonymous witnesses accounts. This is all documented in the Jim Sheridan film, "In the Name of the Father" etc.

For any who take Lance Armstrong's prepared statement as being an admission of guilt, I refer you to the story of the Guildford Four and thousands of other cases where the human psyche breaks under great strain - especially when the legal process set before you lacks procedural and substantive safeguards against injustice. Indeed, that seems to the essence of Armstrong's claim against the USADA's arbitration.

In short - all humans can break under great strain. None are above it.

Yet, some of you self-righteously claim that were it your reputation on the line, you would never break, you would never concede, and you would never let "them" win. I find this highly unlikely.

With or without doping, you cannot even attempt the Tour de France much less win 7 times without the grit and determination of a Marine, an astronaut, or a unrelenting masochist. That Lance Armstrong gave in to the USADA process NOW provides, to me, only evidence of how much financial and emotional strain it has put on him.

Armstrong won't be the last person who couldn't withstand an overzealous prosecution. Bending under strain - and moving on - is not an admission of guilt.

Mr. Obvious wrote:

Not to be negative, but... wrote:

Basically, if we can't catch you in the act with science, we'll come after you later with hearsay testimony and make your life a living hell. They assumed he was guilty from the get go and found a way to make it stick. Sort of like Bush's WMD "evidence".

You have no idea what hearsay is, do you?

You will look very foolish when the evidence comes out.

Uh huh. So all those teammates, Hincappie, Hamiliton, Landis, and others who swore they didn't dope and never saw Armstrong dope are now credible witnesses?

In a court of law, witnesses like that would never be put on the stand.

The everyone is doing it argument is lame

He took the glory now take the pain

He will still be loaded so just further proof that doping pays

bladerunner wrote:

So all those teammates, Hincappie, Hamiliton, Landis, and others who swore they didn't dope and never saw Armstrong dope are now credible witnesses?

they had financial interests to deny and even to lie on behalf of lance armstrong.

they have no financial interests to now come clean about their pasts and also any teammates who encouraged, advised, and participated.

correct me if i'm wrong, but if a suspect claims "not guilty, i wasn't there" initially to the police but then gets a plea deal and later on gets called upon to testify against a fellow gang member, isn't he technically a liar if he admitted to and collaborated with the district attorney?

Graeme Obree broke the world hour record on the track, he was set to go pro, but th epro team looking to sign him wanted him to take PED's. he wouldn't do it, so never had a pro career.

By allowing Armstrong and others to keep titles etc it is basically sayiing "we know the sport was dirty, we know some peopel refused to cheat, but we care more about those who chose to cheat becuase they thought everyone else was doing it than those who chose the moral route".

Interestingly on BBC Radio this morning Obreee highlighted that some of the cycling press had published stories of UCI officials having received payments from someone, can't think who. As UCI only signed up to WADA in 2004 that would mean whoever paid the UCI was paygin the body that tested them at the time. Of course there was no test for EPO amongst other drugs at the time.

To me it is clear Armstrong has a case to answer, in court under oath, and it is a case he has said is nonsense. So why is he not defending himself agasint allegations that he says are nonsense? Should be easy to do. Oh, that's right he woudl have to do it under oath. But of course he never failed a test, so he shouldn't have to defend himself in court. Remind me again, how was Marion Jones caught and how many tests had she failed.

You didn't really just compare prolonged physical torture with an investigation by USADA, did you? No, I'm sure you were kidding. 7/10.

Did it ever occur to you that the existence of this evidence is the reason Armstrong gave up the fight? Why else would he give up other than knowing he was going to wind up screwed to the wall? This is a clear case of a pre-emptive strike.

Imagine that Armstrong had lied about doping all along, while his supporting cast was honest about their own. See how that doesn't quite cohere?

It HAD to have been a group effort, otherwise there would have been no effort at all.

'After days of interrogation, sleep deprivation, coercion, and torture, the "Guildford Four" confessed to IRA bombings they didn't do. They went to prison based on these confessions (later retracted), false accusations, and anonymous witnesses accounts. This is all documented in the Jim Sheridan film, "In the Name of the Father" etc.'

Was not aware that that Lance had been tortured!