BBC: Lance Armstrong to have his 7 titles stripped. - Page 2

LTC8K6 · 23rd August 2012, 11:34 PM

After each stage, four riders are tested: the overall leader, the stage winner, and two riders at random. In addition, every rider is tested before the first day's stage, normally a short time-trial. Most teams are tested in their entirety at some point during the three-week race. Additional testing may take place during the off-season, and riders are expected to keep their national cycling federation informed of their whereabouts so they can be located. Many teams have their own drug testing programs to keep the team name clean. Teams, such as Quick-Step, have pulled riders before they compete in major competitions. Tom Boonen was pulled for cocaine before the 2008 Tour de France.

LTC8K6 · 23rd August 2012, 11:35 PM

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doping_...2C_1998_-_2012

How did they catch all these others, and miss Lance?

davefoc · 24th August 2012, 12:18 AM

Originally Posted by Damien Evans

Except that USADA have no authority to strip him of anything, or in fact to bring these charges, given it's own 8 year statute of limitations. The whole case is bs.

Originally Posted by qayak

Actually, they do in a round about way. UCI is a signer of the World Anti-Doping Code. They really have no choice but to strip them.

Not sure about when the statute of limitations begins but Armstrong only retired last year.

I wondered about all this also. No matter what, it seems like the USADA does not have the power to strip anybody of anything. It sounds like it might have the power to force some other agency to strip somebody of something.

But the USADA also seems to be behaving like some sort of rogue bureaucracy in all this and I wonder if they're going to get anybody to go along with what looks like some kind of whacked anti-Armstrong crusade.

I think Armstrong probably took some kind of performance enhancing drugs, but it was at a time when it was pretty common and the idea that going after him is fair seems whacked to me. It is a pretty simple idea. Armstrong won under the rules and testing that were extent at the time. Why it seems fair to the USADA to attempt to undo that and make somebody else a winner is beyond me. Does the USADA propose to go after everybody that becomes a winner after Armstrong's wins are taken away until they find the level of purity they are after in Tour de France competitors in long ago competitions?

Has the USADA started down the path of investigating every major American athlete that competed before the current level of drug testing expertise was achieved? This will be interesting, if that is what they have in mind. An athlete never knows whether he has won or lost. The results are kept in limbo as each year the athlete's samples are retested using the best technology current for that year. So some athlete that thought he got an Olympic bronze medal ten years ago finds out that after years of submitting his samples for testing the USADA has finally stumbled on a test that produces a positive result and the athlete is stripped of his medal. What total and complete nonsense.

A lot of times I'm not a fan of how the US tax dollars are spent, but funding the bunch of USADA nut jobs to run politicized vendettas seems like a particularly egregious waste of money and resources to me.

ETA:

Originally Posted by LTC8K6

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doping_...2C_1998_-_2012

How did they catch all these others, and miss Lance?

A reasonable question I think and I don't have an answer. My guess that Armstrong took performance enhancing drugs is based on the opinions of people that are knowledgeable about professional bike racing and my general sense that there is enough noise around the issue that I suspect there is something to the allegations. I would be happy to be wrong and I concede that I well might be.

The Don · 24th August 2012, 03:00 AM

Originally Posted by LTC8K6

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doping_...2C_1998_-_2012

How did they catch all these others, and miss Lance?

According to Graeme Obree (who is a tainted source what with him being so bitter and all) on Radio 5 just now, the drug of choice was undetectable at the time.

So if Lance Armstrong was guilty (and I really, really hope that he was not) then it would be because his doctors were better than the drug testers.

The Don · 24th August 2012, 03:06 AM

Originally Posted by davefoc

Has the USADA started down the path of investigating every major American athlete that competed before the current level of drug testing expertise was achieved? This will be interesting, if that is what they have in mind. An athlete never knows whether he has won or lost. The results are kept in limbo as each year the athlete's samples are retested using the best technology current for that year. So some athlete that thought he got an Olympic bronze medal ten years ago finds out that after years of submitting his samples for testing the USADA has finally stumbled on a test that produces a positive result and the athlete is stripped of his medal. What total and complete nonsense.

USADA's actions against Lance Armstrong certainly smack of a vendetta to me but then again their actions against Marion Jones meant that a dirty athlete was rightly stripped of her medals.

If I was a clean runner who missed out in that Olympic bronze medal because one or more of the medallists was dirty then I'd be very interested in justice being done. That said, it isn't a level playing field, USADA may be undertaking a thorough examination but similar bodies in the rest of the world are not so the medals may end up being stripped from a dirty US athlete and then being passed to an equally dirty (but unchallenged) athlete from another country.

LTC8K6 · 24th August 2012, 04:30 AM

Originally Posted by The Don

According to Graeme Obree (who is a tainted source what with him being so bitter and all) on Radio 5 just now, the drug of choice was undetectable at the time.

So if Lance Armstrong was guilty (and I really, really hope that he was not) then it would be because his doctors were better than the drug testers.

And Lance was the only cyclist who knew of this undetectable method?

Seems very unlikely.

Lance should release these organizations from confidentiality wrt his test results/reports. Let's see what they actually have.

That would put the ball in their court.

Resume · 24th August 2012, 04:51 AM

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bay_Are...y_Co-operative

The point of these PEDs (beside the PE) is that they are cutting edge, and slightly ahead of the testing curve.

That's what you pay for: i.e. Barry Bonds, Sammy Sosa, Mark McGwire, et al.

ponderingturtle · 24th August 2012, 04:57 AM

Originally Posted by Matthew Best

The evidence is that he's not contesting the charges. Now that's happened, they have no choice but to strip him of his titles.

So who came second in those 7 Tours de France?

Some less famous guy who was doping too.

DC · 24th August 2012, 04:58 AM

Damn, not that i ever watched a whole etappe of a tour. and usually i asume the cyclist is doped to the max. but Armstrong. i always assumed he was clean. Very disapointing.

maybe they should just legalize doping, then we can see witch pharma company has the best doping. Maybe cycling is then like the turbo times in the formula one

LTC8K6 · 24th August 2012, 05:02 AM

Originally Posted by Resume

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bay_Are...y_Co-operative

The point of these PEDs (beside the PE) is that they are cutting edge, and slightly ahead of the testing curve.

That's what you pay for: i.e. Barry Bonds, Sammy Sosa, Mark McGwire, et al.

Steroids were not illegal for those players, iirc. They were not even tested for PEDs for the majority of their careers. It's easy to use PEDs when you are not tested for them, and even if you are tested, there are no consequences.

The TDF is completely different.

Besides, the USADA apparently has no real evidence from Lance's tour win years.

Dcdrac · 24th August 2012, 05:04 AM

If he is innocent why is he not contesting it?

Resume · 24th August 2012, 05:06 AM

Originally Posted by LTC8K6

Steroids were not illegal for those players, iirc. They were not even tested for PEDs for the majority of their careers. It's easy to use PEDs when you are not tested for them, and even if you are tested, there are no consequences.

The TDF is completely different.

Besides, the USADA apparently has no real evidence from Lance's tour win years.

I think they have witnesses to the doping.

LTC8K6 · 24th August 2012, 05:07 AM

Originally Posted by Dcdrac

If he is innocent why is he not contesting it?

He's tired of contesting such charges.

The USADA probably can't actually strip him of the TDF wins.

He won the TDF's under the rules and testing applied to him at the time of the competitions.

He doesn't care anymore, he has moved on with his work and his foundation.

Resume · 24th August 2012, 05:08 AM

Originally Posted by LTC8K6

He's tired of contesting such charges.

The USADA probably can't actually strip him of the TDF wins.

He won the TDF's under the rules and testing applied to him at the time of the competitions.

He doesn't care anymore, he has moved on with his work and his foundation.

Or his lawyers advised him to shut up.

LTC8K6 · 24th August 2012, 05:09 AM

Originally Posted by Resume

I think they have witnesses to the doping.

And these witnesses said nothing at the time? They just let Lance go?

Resume · 24th August 2012, 05:10 AM

Originally Posted by LTC8K6

And these witnesses said nothing at the time? They just let Lance go?

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/06/sp...pagewanted=all

I think it's more complicated.

WildCat · 24th August 2012, 05:12 AM

Originally Posted by Matthew Best

So who came second in those 7 Tours de France?

The doped-up cyclists who haven't been caught yet.

Resume · 24th August 2012, 05:18 AM

Originally Posted by DC

maybe they should just legalize doping, then we can see witch pharma company has the best doping. Maybe cycling is then like the turbo times in the formula one

I think they should for all sports. Make 'em like the WWE, and then I can stop wasting my time with them.

LTC8K6 · 24th August 2012, 05:24 AM

Quote:

Hincapie’s word would be especially harmful for Armstrong, considering the two have said they are as close as brothers. Like Andy Pettitte, who testified against his friend Roger Clemens at Clemens’s perjury trial, Hincapie is likely to be a reluctant witness, and thus might seem even more credible

.

Andy Pettite basically reversed himself later under oath regarding Clemens...saying he might not have heard what he swore he'd heard earlier...

http://articles.latimes.com/2012/may...emens-20120503

Resume · 24th August 2012, 05:39 AM

Originally Posted by LTC8K6

.

Andy Pettite basically reversed himself later under oath regarding Clemens...saying he might not have heard what he swore he'd heard earlier...

http://articles.latimes.com/2012/may...emens-20120503

How utterly convenient for Clemens.

Pettite is like Frankie Pentangeli.

BenBurch · 24th August 2012, 05:47 AM

Originally Posted by Susheel

What are the possibilities of false positives from the drugs he was taking for cancer?

What are the possibilities that his cancer was caused by the doping?

DrDave · 24th August 2012, 05:50 AM

Do the rules ban classes of substances or specific chemicals

If they can't detect it I can't see how they can hope to be able to ban something

LTC8K6 · 24th August 2012, 05:56 AM

The feds did not press charges despite hearing all of these witnesses.

http://www.cnn.com/2012/02/03/sport/...html?hpt=hp_t3

LTC8K6 · 24th August 2012, 05:58 AM

Quote:

A 1999 urine sample showed traces of corticosteroid in an amount that was not in the positive range. A medical certificate showed he used an approved cream for saddle sores which contained the substance.

Merely rubbing this cream on his skin resulted in a detectable amount of steroids in his urine in 1999...

LTC8K6 · 24th August 2012, 06:18 AM

The UCI has apparently said that USADA will have to present it's case before any action will be taken regarding the TDF titles.

Tatyana · 24th August 2012, 06:38 AM

Originally Posted by LTC8K6

Is there an explanation for passing several hundred tests?

He failed the tests for EPO when they were developed.

They store samples for testing when new methods are made available.

Newtons Bit · 24th August 2012, 07:10 AM

Originally Posted by Tatyana

He failed the tests for EPO when they were developed.

They store samples for testing when new methods are made available.

Source?

DrDave · 24th August 2012, 07:12 AM

Originally Posted by Newtons Bit

Source?

They would take the blood from the cyclist, surely?

Damien Evans · 24th August 2012, 07:34 AM

Originally Posted by The Don

USADA's actions against Lance Armstrong certainly smack of a vendetta to me but then again their actions against Marion Jones meant that a dirty athlete was rightly stripped of her medals.

If I was a clean runner who missed out in that Olympic bronze medal because one or more of the medallists was dirty then I'd be very interested in justice being done. That said, it isn't a level playing field, USADA may be undertaking a thorough examination but similar bodies in the rest of the world are not so the medals may end up being stripped from a dirty US athlete and then being passed to an equally dirty (but unchallenged) athlete from another country.

But this isn't clean riders missing out. At least 6 of the second place getters to Lance are dirty.

And USADA are not more thorough than the French authorities, I can assure you of that. Just ask Remy Di Gregorio.

Damien Evans · 24th August 2012, 07:38 AM

Originally Posted by Resume

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bay_Are...y_Co-operative

The point of these PEDs (beside the PE) is that they are cutting edge, and slightly ahead of the testing curve.

That's what you pay for: i.e. Barry Bonds, Sammy Sosa, Mark McGwire, et al.

What's BALCO got to do with Lance Armstrong?

These are more relevant, at least there are cyclists involved:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Festina_affair
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operaci...to_doping_case

One of Lances accusers, Tyler Hamilton is even in there, not that I'd ever believe a word out of his mouth.

Damien Evans · 24th August 2012, 07:41 AM

Originally Posted by DC

Damn, not that i ever watched a whole etappe of a tour. and usually i asume the cyclist is doped to the max. but Armstrong. i always assumed he was clean. Very disapointing.

maybe they should just legalize doping, then we can see witch pharma company has the best doping. Maybe cycling is then like the turbo times in the formula one

Why would they legalise doping when they've finally got it relatively under control?

Damien Evans · 24th August 2012, 07:44 AM

Originally Posted by DrDave

They would take the blood from the cyclist, surely?

He meant source for the story.

Damien Evans · 24th August 2012, 07:45 AM

Originally Posted by WildCat

The doped-up cyclists who haven't been caught yet.

Actually most of them were caught at one stage or another.

Marcus · 24th August 2012, 07:47 AM

Originally Posted by LTC8K6

Is there an explanation for passing several hundred tests?

It's a matter of timing and dosage. EPO allows you to train harder, it's not something you need to take during a race. All you have to worry about are the random tests and there some ways to get around them. There was the famous "shower incident", an official surprised Lance after a ride, Lance disappeared to "take a shower" and made the official wait 2 hours. Technically a violation but UCI chose not to sanction.

With blood doping (saving your own blood for later use) it's important to be accurate. You're safe as long as you don't take too much and bust the red cell level on the test.

It's all about having good doctors. Floyd didn't get caught until he was dropped from the team and lost their docs.

Most cyclists are not caught by tests but by possession of drugs or blood bags.

Marcus · 24th August 2012, 07:59 AM

Originally Posted by qayak

Yes, testing tech was behind doping tech. USADA says they have blood tests from 1999 and as early as 1996 that are consistent with doping using the new technology.

It was 2 or 3 years ago that three of Lance's samples from 1999 were found positive for EPO, but the time limit had passed for sanctions.

Damien Evans · 24th August 2012, 08:03 AM

Originally Posted by Marcus

It's a matter of timing and dosage. EPO allows you to train harder, it's not something you need to take during a race. All you have to worry about are the random tests and there some ways to get around them. There was the famous "shower incident", an official surprised Lance after a ride, Lance disappeared to "take a shower" and made the official wait 2 hours. Technically a violation but UCI chose not to sanction.

With blood doping (saving your own blood for later use) it's important to be accurate. You're safe as long as you don't take too much and bust the red cell level on the test.

It's all about having good doctors. Floyd didn't get caught until he was dropped from the team and lost their docs.

Most cyclists are not caught by tests but by possession of drugs or blood bags.

No, Floyd got caught by testing positive on one of the biggest stages of the tour. it was as a result of that he was dropped by his team.

Marcus · 24th August 2012, 08:05 AM

Originally Posted by Damien Evans

All of this I agree with. Lance was either an absolute freak of nature or a doper.

Both I think. Lance was a superior athlete, he didn't get the highest VO2 ever tested by using the same chemical assistance that his competitors were using. I hate it that his titles will probably be stripped

chillzero · 24th August 2012, 08:08 AM

I'd like to echo this question:

Originally Posted by DrDave

Do the rules ban classes of substances or specific chemicals

Marcus · 24th August 2012, 08:11 AM

Originally Posted by Damien Evans

No, Floyd got caught by testing positive on one of the biggest stages of the tour. it was as a result of that he was dropped by his team.

Floyd moved from US Postal (Lances team) to Phonak in 2005, losing the expertise of their doctors. He won the TDF in 2006 and was stripped of that title after testing positive.

Resume · 24th August 2012, 08:12 AM

Originally Posted by Damien Evans

One of Lances accusers, Tyler Hamilton is even in there, not that I'd ever believe a word out of his mouth.

Who would you believe?

23rd August 2012, 11:34 PM	#41
LTC8K6 Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Directly under a deadly chemtrail Posts: 12,676	After each stage, four riders are tested: the overall leader, the stage winner, and two riders at random. In addition, every rider is tested before the first day's stage, normally a short time-trial. Most teams are tested in their entirety at some point during the three-week race. Additional testing may take place during the off-season, and riders are expected to keep their national cycling federation informed of their whereabouts so they can be located. Many teams have their own drug testing programs to keep the team name clean. Teams, such as Quick-Step, have pulled riders before they compete in major competitions. Tom Boonen was pulled for cocaine before the 2008 Tour de France.
	__________________ What a fool believes, no wise man has the power to reason away. What seems to be, is always better than nothing. 2 prints, same midtarsal crock..., I mean break?

23rd August 2012, 11:35 PM	#42
LTC8K6 Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Directly under a deadly chemtrail Posts: 12,676	http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doping_...2C_1998_-_2012 How did they catch all these others, and miss Lance?
	__________________ What a fool believes, no wise man has the power to reason away. What seems to be, is always better than nothing. 2 prints, same midtarsal crock..., I mean break?

24th August 2012, 12:18 AM	#43
davefoc Philosopher Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: orange country, california Posts: 7,261	Originally Posted by Damien Evans Except that USADA have no authority to strip him of anything, or in fact to bring these charges, given it's own 8 year statute of limitations. The whole case is bs. Originally Posted by qayak Actually, they do in a round about way. UCI is a signer of the World Anti-Doping Code. They really have no choice but to strip them. Not sure about when the statute of limitations begins but Armstrong only retired last year. I wondered about all this also. No matter what, it seems like the USADA does not have the power to strip anybody of anything. It sounds like it might have the power to force some other agency to strip somebody of something. But the USADA also seems to be behaving like some sort of rogue bureaucracy in all this and I wonder if they're going to get anybody to go along with what looks like some kind of whacked anti-Armstrong crusade. I think Armstrong probably took some kind of performance enhancing drugs, but it was at a time when it was pretty common and the idea that going after him is fair seems whacked to me. It is a pretty simple idea. Armstrong won under the rules and testing that were extent at the time. Why it seems fair to the USADA to attempt to undo that and make somebody else a winner is beyond me. Does the USADA propose to go after everybody that becomes a winner after Armstrong's wins are taken away until they find the level of purity they are after in Tour de France competitors in long ago competitions? Has the USADA started down the path of investigating every major American athlete that competed before the current level of drug testing expertise was achieved? This will be interesting, if that is what they have in mind. An athlete never knows whether he has won or lost. The results are kept in limbo as each year the athlete's samples are retested using the best technology current for that year. So some athlete that thought he got an Olympic bronze medal ten years ago finds out that after years of submitting his samples for testing the USADA has finally stumbled on a test that produces a positive result and the athlete is stripped of his medal. What total and complete nonsense. A lot of times I'm not a fan of how the US tax dollars are spent, but funding the bunch of USADA nut jobs to run politicized vendettas seems like a particularly egregious waste of money and resources to me. ETA: Originally Posted by LTC8K6 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doping_...2C_1998_-_2012 How did they catch all these others, and miss Lance? A reasonable question I think and I don't have an answer. My guess that Armstrong took performance enhancing drugs is based on the opinions of people that are knowledgeable about professional bike racing and my general sense that there is enough noise around the issue that I suspect there is something to the allegations. I would be happy to be wrong and I concede that I well might be.
	__________________ The way of truth is along the path of intellectual sincerity. -- Henry S. Pritchett Perfection is the enemy of good enough -- Russian proverb Last edited by davefoc; 24th August 2012 at 12:25 AM.

24th August 2012, 04:30 AM	#46
LTC8K6 Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Directly under a deadly chemtrail Posts: 12,676	Originally Posted by The Don According to Graeme Obree (who is a tainted source what with him being so bitter and all) on Radio 5 just now, the drug of choice was undetectable at the time. So if Lance Armstrong was guilty (and I really, really hope that he was not) then it would be because his doctors were better than the drug testers. And Lance was the only cyclist who knew of this undetectable method? Seems very unlikely. Lance should release these organizations from confidentiality wrt his test results/reports. Let's see what they actually have. That would put the ball in their court.
	__________________ What a fool believes, no wise man has the power to reason away. What seems to be, is always better than nothing. 2 prints, same midtarsal crock..., I mean break?

24th August 2012, 04:51 AM	#47
Resume Philosopher Join Date: Apr 2010 Posts: 8,035	http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bay_Are...y_Co-operative The point of these PEDs (beside the PE) is that they are cutting edge, and slightly ahead of the testing curve. That's what you pay for: i.e. Barry Bonds, Sammy Sosa, Mark McGwire, et al.
Resume Philosopher Join Date: Apr 2010 Posts: 8,035

24th August 2012, 03:00 AM	#44
The Don Philosopher Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Cymru Posts: 8,265	Originally Posted by LTC8K6 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doping_...2C_1998_-_2012 How did they catch all these others, and miss Lance? According to Graeme Obree (who is a tainted source what with him being so bitter and all) on Radio 5 just now, the drug of choice was undetectable at the time. So if Lance Armstrong was guilty (and I really, really hope that he was not) then it would be because his doctors were better than the drug testers.

24th August 2012, 03:06 AM	#45
The Don Philosopher Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Cymru Posts: 8,265	Originally Posted by davefoc Has the USADA started down the path of investigating every major American athlete that competed before the current level of drug testing expertise was achieved? This will be interesting, if that is what they have in mind. An athlete never knows whether he has won or lost. The results are kept in limbo as each year the athlete's samples are retested using the best technology current for that year. So some athlete that thought he got an Olympic bronze medal ten years ago finds out that after years of submitting his samples for testing the USADA has finally stumbled on a test that produces a positive result and the athlete is stripped of his medal. What total and complete nonsense. USADA's actions against Lance Armstrong certainly smack of a vendetta to me but then again their actions against Marion Jones meant that a dirty athlete was rightly stripped of her medals. If I was a clean runner who missed out in that Olympic bronze medal because one or more of the medallists was dirty then I'd be very interested in justice being done. That said, it isn't a level playing field, USADA may be undertaking a thorough examination but similar bodies in the rest of the world are not so the medals may end up being stripped from a dirty US athlete and then being passed to an equally dirty (but unchallenged) athlete from another country.

24th August 2012, 04:57 AM	#48
ponderingturtle Orthogonal Vector Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Tarrytown, NY Posts: 26,433	Originally Posted by Matthew Best The evidence is that he's not contesting the charges. Now that's happened, they have no choice but to strip him of his titles. So who came second in those 7 Tours de France? Some less famous guy who was doping too.
	__________________ Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody "There shall be no poofing in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin

24th August 2012, 04:58 AM	#49
DC dedicated aphilatelist Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Switzerland Posts: 21,675	Damn, not that i ever watched a whole etappe of a tour. and usually i asume the cyclist is doped to the max. but Armstrong. i always assumed he was clean. Very disapointing. maybe they should just legalize doping, then we can see witch pharma company has the best doping. Maybe cycling is then like the turbo times in the formula one
	__________________ AGW is a fact, including the A, face it

24th August 2012, 05:02 AM	#50
LTC8K6 Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Directly under a deadly chemtrail Posts: 12,676	Originally Posted by Resume http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bay_Are...y_Co-operative The point of these PEDs (beside the PE) is that they are cutting edge, and slightly ahead of the testing curve. That's what you pay for: i.e. Barry Bonds, Sammy Sosa, Mark McGwire, et al. Steroids were not illegal for those players, iirc. They were not even tested for PEDs for the majority of their careers. It's easy to use PEDs when you are not tested for them, and even if you are tested, there are no consequences. The TDF is completely different. Besides, the USADA apparently has no real evidence from Lance's tour win years.
	__________________ What a fool believes, no wise man has the power to reason away. What seems to be, is always better than nothing. 2 prints, same midtarsal crock..., I mean break?

24th August 2012, 05:04 AM	#51
Dcdrac Illuminator Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 3,680	If he is innocent why is he not contesting it?
Dcdrac Illuminator Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 3,680

24th August 2012, 05:06 AM	#52
Resume Philosopher Join Date: Apr 2010 Posts: 8,035	Originally Posted by LTC8K6 Steroids were not illegal for those players, iirc. They were not even tested for PEDs for the majority of their careers. It's easy to use PEDs when you are not tested for them, and even if you are tested, there are no consequences. The TDF is completely different. Besides, the USADA apparently has no real evidence from Lance's tour win years. I think they have witnesses to the doping.
Resume Philosopher Join Date: Apr 2010 Posts: 8,035	Last edited by Resume; 24th August 2012 at 05:08 AM.

24th August 2012, 05:07 AM	#53
LTC8K6 Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Directly under a deadly chemtrail Posts: 12,676	Originally Posted by Dcdrac If he is innocent why is he not contesting it? He's tired of contesting such charges. The USADA probably can't actually strip him of the TDF wins. He won the TDF's under the rules and testing applied to him at the time of the competitions. He doesn't care anymore, he has moved on with his work and his foundation.
	__________________ What a fool believes, no wise man has the power to reason away. What seems to be, is always better than nothing. 2 prints, same midtarsal crock..., I mean break?

24th August 2012, 05:08 AM	#54
Resume Philosopher Join Date: Apr 2010 Posts: 8,035	Originally Posted by LTC8K6 He's tired of contesting such charges. The USADA probably can't actually strip him of the TDF wins. He won the TDF's under the rules and testing applied to him at the time of the competitions. He doesn't care anymore, he has moved on with his work and his foundation. Or his lawyers advised him to shut up.
Resume Philosopher Join Date: Apr 2010 Posts: 8,035

24th August 2012, 05:09 AM	#55
LTC8K6 Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Directly under a deadly chemtrail Posts: 12,676	Originally Posted by Resume I think they have witnesses to the doping. And these witnesses said nothing at the time? They just let Lance go?
	__________________ What a fool believes, no wise man has the power to reason away. What seems to be, is always better than nothing. 2 prints, same midtarsal crock..., I mean break?

24th August 2012, 05:10 AM	#56
Resume Philosopher Join Date: Apr 2010 Posts: 8,035	Originally Posted by LTC8K6 And these witnesses said nothing at the time? They just let Lance go? http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/06/sp...pagewanted=all I think it's more complicated.
Resume Philosopher Join Date: Apr 2010 Posts: 8,035

24th August 2012, 05:12 AM	#57
WildCat NWO Master Conspirator Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Albany Park, Chicago Posts: 49,101	Originally Posted by Matthew Best So who came second in those 7 Tours de France? The doped-up cyclists who haven't been caught yet.

24th August 2012, 05:18 AM	#58
Resume Philosopher Join Date: Apr 2010 Posts: 8,035	Originally Posted by DC maybe they should just legalize doping, then we can see witch pharma company has the best doping. Maybe cycling is then like the turbo times in the formula one I think they should for all sports. Make 'em like the WWE, and then I can stop wasting my time with them.
Resume Philosopher Join Date: Apr 2010 Posts: 8,035

24th August 2012, 05:24 AM	#59
LTC8K6 Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Directly under a deadly chemtrail Posts: 12,676	Quote: Hincapie’s word would be especially harmful for Armstrong, considering the two have said they are as close as brothers. Like Andy Pettitte, who testified against his friend Roger Clemens at Clemens’s perjury trial, Hincapie is likely to be a reluctant witness, and thus might seem even more credible . Andy Pettite basically reversed himself later under oath regarding Clemens...saying he might not have heard what he swore he'd heard earlier... http://articles.latimes.com/2012/may...emens-20120503
	__________________ What a fool believes, no wise man has the power to reason away. What seems to be, is always better than nothing. 2 prints, same midtarsal crock..., I mean break?

24th August 2012, 05:39 AM	#60
Resume Philosopher Join Date: Apr 2010 Posts: 8,035	Originally Posted by LTC8K6 . Andy Pettite basically reversed himself later under oath regarding Clemens...saying he might not have heard what he swore he'd heard earlier... http://articles.latimes.com/2012/may...emens-20120503 How utterly convenient for Clemens. Pettite is like Frankie Pentangeli.
Resume Philosopher Join Date: Apr 2010 Posts: 8,035	Last edited by Resume; 24th August 2012 at 05:43 AM.

24th August 2012, 05:47 AM	#61
BenBurch Gatekeeper of The Left Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: The Universe 35.2 ms ahead of this one. Posts: 32,194	Originally Posted by Susheel What are the possibilities of false positives from the drugs he was taking for cancer? What are the possibilities that his cancer was caused by the doping?
	__________________ Are you IN? Join the IN crowd now!

24th August 2012, 05:50 AM	#62
DrDave Guest Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Geneva Posts: 3,110	Do the rules ban classes of substances or specific chemicals If they can't detect it I can't see how they can hope to be able to ban something

24th August 2012, 05:56 AM	#63
LTC8K6 Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Directly under a deadly chemtrail Posts: 12,676	The feds did not press charges despite hearing all of these witnesses. http://www.cnn.com/2012/02/03/sport/...html?hpt=hp_t3
	__________________ What a fool believes, no wise man has the power to reason away. What seems to be, is always better than nothing. 2 prints, same midtarsal crock..., I mean break?

24th August 2012, 05:58 AM	#64
LTC8K6 Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Directly under a deadly chemtrail Posts: 12,676	Quote: A 1999 urine sample showed traces of corticosteroid in an amount that was not in the positive range. A medical certificate showed he used an approved cream for saddle sores which contained the substance. Merely rubbing this cream on his skin resulted in a detectable amount of steroids in his urine in 1999...
	__________________ What a fool believes, no wise man has the power to reason away. What seems to be, is always better than nothing. 2 prints, same midtarsal crock..., I mean break?

24th August 2012, 06:18 AM	#65
LTC8K6 Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Directly under a deadly chemtrail Posts: 12,676	The UCI has apparently said that USADA will have to present it's case before any action will be taken regarding the TDF titles.
	__________________ What a fool believes, no wise man has the power to reason away. What seems to be, is always better than nothing. 2 prints, same midtarsal crock..., I mean break?

24th August 2012, 06:38 AM	#66
Tatyana Illuminator Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: Experiment 1: Flame and Flesh Posts: 3,431	Originally Posted by LTC8K6 Is there an explanation for passing several hundred tests? He failed the tests for EPO when they were developed. They store samples for testing when new methods are made available.

24th August 2012, 07:10 AM	#67
Newtons Bit Philosopher Join Date: Apr 2007 Posts: 6,902	Originally Posted by Tatyana He failed the tests for EPO when they were developed. They store samples for testing when new methods are made available. Source?
Newtons Bit Philosopher Join Date: Apr 2007 Posts: 6,902	__________________ "Structural Engineering is the art of molding materials we do not wholly understand into shapes we cannot precisely analyze so as to understand forces we cannot really assess in such a way that the community at large has no reason to suspect the extent of our own ignorance." James E Amrhein My website.

24th August 2012, 07:12 AM	#68
DrDave Guest Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Geneva Posts: 3,110	Originally Posted by Newtons Bit Source? They would take the blood from the cyclist, surely?

24th August 2012, 07:34 AM	#69
Damien Evans Up The Irons Tagger Join Date: May 2007 Location: Melbourne, Australia Posts: 25,307	Originally Posted by The Don USADA's actions against Lance Armstrong certainly smack of a vendetta to me but then again their actions against Marion Jones meant that a dirty athlete was rightly stripped of her medals. If I was a clean runner who missed out in that Olympic bronze medal because one or more of the medallists was dirty then I'd be very interested in justice being done. That said, it isn't a level playing field, USADA may be undertaking a thorough examination but similar bodies in the rest of the world are not so the medals may end up being stripped from a dirty US athlete and then being passed to an equally dirty (but unchallenged) athlete from another country. But this isn't clean riders missing out. At least 6 of the second place getters to Lance are dirty. And USADA are not more thorough than the French authorities, I can assure you of that. Just ask Remy Di Gregorio.
	__________________ WHAT CAN THE HARVEST HOPE FOR, IF NOT THE CARE OF THE REAPER MAN? - Death "Racism is a disease in society. We're all equal. I don't care what their colour is, or religion. Just as long as they're human beings they're my buddies." - Mandawuy Yunupingu, lead singer of Yothu Yindi

24th August 2012, 07:38 AM	#70
Damien Evans Up The Irons Tagger Join Date: May 2007 Location: Melbourne, Australia Posts: 25,307	Originally Posted by Resume http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bay_Are...y_Co-operative The point of these PEDs (beside the PE) is that they are cutting edge, and slightly ahead of the testing curve. That's what you pay for: i.e. Barry Bonds, Sammy Sosa, Mark McGwire, et al. What's BALCO got to do with Lance Armstrong? These are more relevant, at least there are cyclists involved: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Festina_affair http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operaci...to_doping_case One of Lances accusers, Tyler Hamilton is even in there, not that I'd ever believe a word out of his mouth.
	__________________ WHAT CAN THE HARVEST HOPE FOR, IF NOT THE CARE OF THE REAPER MAN? - Death "Racism is a disease in society. We're all equal. I don't care what their colour is, or religion. Just as long as they're human beings they're my buddies." - Mandawuy Yunupingu, lead singer of Yothu Yindi

24th August 2012, 07:41 AM	#71
Damien Evans Up The Irons Tagger Join Date: May 2007 Location: Melbourne, Australia Posts: 25,307	Originally Posted by DC Damn, not that i ever watched a whole etappe of a tour. and usually i asume the cyclist is doped to the max. but Armstrong. i always assumed he was clean. Very disapointing. maybe they should just legalize doping, then we can see witch pharma company has the best doping. Maybe cycling is then like the turbo times in the formula one Why would they legalise doping when they've finally got it relatively under control?
	__________________ WHAT CAN THE HARVEST HOPE FOR, IF NOT THE CARE OF THE REAPER MAN? - Death "Racism is a disease in society. We're all equal. I don't care what their colour is, or religion. Just as long as they're human beings they're my buddies." - Mandawuy Yunupingu, lead singer of Yothu Yindi

24th August 2012, 07:44 AM	#72
Damien Evans Up The Irons Tagger Join Date: May 2007 Location: Melbourne, Australia Posts: 25,307	Originally Posted by DrDave They would take the blood from the cyclist, surely? He meant source for the story.
	__________________ WHAT CAN THE HARVEST HOPE FOR, IF NOT THE CARE OF THE REAPER MAN? - Death "Racism is a disease in society. We're all equal. I don't care what their colour is, or religion. Just as long as they're human beings they're my buddies." - Mandawuy Yunupingu, lead singer of Yothu Yindi

24th August 2012, 07:45 AM	#73
Damien Evans Up The Irons Tagger Join Date: May 2007 Location: Melbourne, Australia Posts: 25,307	Originally Posted by WildCat The doped-up cyclists who haven't been caught yet. Actually most of them were caught at one stage or another.
	__________________ WHAT CAN THE HARVEST HOPE FOR, IF NOT THE CARE OF THE REAPER MAN? - Death "Racism is a disease in society. We're all equal. I don't care what their colour is, or religion. Just as long as they're human beings they're my buddies." - Mandawuy Yunupingu, lead singer of Yothu Yindi

24th August 2012, 07:47 AM	#74
Marcus Graduate Poster Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Austin Posts: 1,841	Originally Posted by LTC8K6 Is there an explanation for passing several hundred tests? It's a matter of timing and dosage. EPO allows you to train harder, it's not something you need to take during a race. All you have to worry about are the random tests and there some ways to get around them. There was the famous "shower incident", an official surprised Lance after a ride, Lance disappeared to "take a shower" and made the official wait 2 hours. Technically a violation but UCI chose not to sanction. With blood doping (saving your own blood for later use) it's important to be accurate. You're safe as long as you don't take too much and bust the red cell level on the test. It's all about having good doctors. Floyd didn't get caught until he was dropped from the team and lost their docs. Most cyclists are not caught by tests but by possession of drugs or blood bags.

24th August 2012, 07:59 AM	#75
Marcus Graduate Poster Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Austin Posts: 1,841	Originally Posted by qayak Yes, testing tech was behind doping tech. USADA says they have blood tests from 1999 and as early as 1996 that are consistent with doping using the new technology. It was 2 or 3 years ago that three of Lance's samples from 1999 were found positive for EPO, but the time limit had passed for sanctions.