Armstrong drops fight against doping charges

Discussion in 'Odds & Ends' started by Bartelby, Aug 23, 2012.

  1. jonnythan

    jonnythan Professional

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2009
    Messages:
    1,356
    Insider knowledge? Please share with the rest of the class, because they've never said or even implied they have such samples.
     
  2. Bartelby

    Bartelby G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2005
    Messages:
    12,977
    They've said they've got positive samples and he failed to defend himself against the charges and remarked at the same time that he had never gained any 'unfair advantage'.
     
  3. jonnythan

    jonnythan Professional

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2009
    Messages:
    1,356
    Link please?
     
  4. jonnythan

    jonnythan Professional

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2009
    Messages:
    1,356
    Just looked it up.

    A French TV show claims the USADA has positive samples. The USADA does not say they have positive samples.
     
  5. Bartelby

    Bartelby G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2005
    Messages:
    12,977
    Its not just French TV, but the reports seem reliable and the fact is that if Armstrong had defended the charges all the information would have been publicly available already, including his rebuttal of the charges and the evidence.

    Apparently, an extensive judgement/report is forthcoming and the UCI has demanded it and has been assured it will be forthcoming.
     
  6. jonnythan

    jonnythan Professional

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2009
    Messages:
    1,356
    It is just French TV. The only articles I've found that mention any sort of source at all only mention this French TV show.

    Even if the USADA has positive samples, it's a simple fact that the USADA has not said that they have positive samples. You said "[the USADA] said they've got positive samples" and this is not true.
     
  7. Bartelby

    Bartelby G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2005
    Messages:
    12,977
    USA Today:


    'The USADA said it had overwhelming evidence that Armstrong doped, including witnesses and blood samples. Armstrong has maintained his innocence and said he didn't want to fight USADA anymore because he considered it an unfair and unconstitutional fight.'
     
  8. Bartelby

    Bartelby G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2005
    Messages:
    12,977
    Daily Telegraph:

    'June 2012 - USADA officially charges Armstrong with doping, based on blood samples from 2009 and 2010, and testimonies from other cyclists. Armstrong was charged in a letter from USADA, along with five others, including former team manager Johan Bruyneel.'
     
  9. Bartelby

    Bartelby G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2005
    Messages:
    12,977
    USADA press release:


    'Numerous witnesses provided evidence to USADA based on personal knowledge acquired, either through direct observation of doping activity by Armstrong,or through Armstrong’s admissions of doping to them that Armstrong used EPO, blood transfusions, testosterone and cortisone during the period from before 1998 through 2005, and that he had previously used EPO, testosterone and hGH through 1996. Witnesses also provided evidence that Lance Armstrong gave to them, encouraged them to use and administered doping products or methods, including EPO, blood transfusions, testosterone and cortisone during the period from 1999 through 2005. Additionally, scientific data showed Mr. Armstrong’s use of blood manipulation including EPO or blood transfusions during Mr. Armstrong’s comeback to cycling in the 2009 Tour de France./
     
  10. jonnythan

    jonnythan Professional

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2009
    Messages:
    1,356
    The USADA said those samples "were consistent with" EPO use, not that they actually had EPO or anything.

    Furthermore, these samples are from 2009 and 20010 - 5-11 years after the victories they want to vacate.
     
  11. Bartelby

    Bartelby G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2005
    Messages:
    12,977
    Its a formula of words they use because its not a simple issue like blood alcohol content.

    You spoke of no physical evidence not there had to be multiple instances of physical evidence for each and every victory to be nullified.

    This is not a credible position and the other evidence was used in relation to these and other matters.
     
  12. jonnythan

    jonnythan Professional

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2009
    Messages:
    1,356
    Whatever the formula of words, the USADA has not said they have positive samples. They may have positive samples, but they haven't said they do.
     
  13. Bartelby

    Bartelby G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2005
    Messages:
    12,977
    You want to put words into the mouths of others. And you've no expertise in the area to do so.
     
  14. jonnythan

    jonnythan Professional

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2009
    Messages:
    1,356
    It seems you're the one trying to put words into the mouths of others.

    You claimed that the USADA announced they have samples of Lance's blood that are positive for doping.

    They have not claimed this. End of story.
     
  15. Bartelby

    Bartelby G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2005
    Messages:
    12,977
    The reality is that you keep changing the goalposts to get Lance, as you call him, off the hook.

    Moreover, you keep wanting bodies to use your terminology even when they have physical evidence that was not rebutted.

    His samples came back with evidence consistent with blood doping among other things.

    So they don't use the word 'positive'. There's no point to your nonsense other than a desperate attempt to avoid reality.
     
  16. jonnythan

    jonnythan Professional

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2009
    Messages:
    1,356
    I haven't changed any goal posts.

    I've been saying for a long time that it doesn't make sense to vacate past victories for which you cannot produce a sample of tainted blood.

    That's the goal post. If they can produce a sample of tainted blood from one of Lance's Tour victories, then it makes sense to vacate that victory. Some testimony from a bunch of guys that have either been caught doping themselves, have books to sell, or have a personal beef with Lance isn't enough to vacate 7 Tour victories.
     
  17. Bartelby

    Bartelby G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2005
    Messages:
    12,977
    You're not the tribunal and your fantasy goalposts are ridiculous (as previously discussed) and Armstrong failed to front the tribunal so he has to cop his guilt.

    You started off claiming that only french tv was stating there was any physical evidence and you were wrong on that and on everything else.

    Of course, if everything that is real is redefined in the fantasy land of your imagination Armstrong will end by being canonized a saint.

    By the way, you are now talking about 'tainted blood', whatever that means, so the terminology changes again.
     
    Last edited: Sep 10, 2012
  18. jonnythan

    jonnythan Professional

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2009
    Messages:
    1,356
    You said:
    "[USADA] said they've got positive samples"

    This is false. The reality is that a French TV show said that the USADA has positive samples. The USADA never said they have positive samples.

    The closest the USADA got was saying that they had samples that are "consistent with" EPO use in 2009 and 2010, which are not from his victory days and also not a claim that they are "positive" for anything.
     
  19. Bartelby

    Bartelby G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2005
    Messages:
    12,977
    Its not for you to decide what terminology should be in use.

    The samples show he's a drug cheat, end of story.

    I say now he's a drug cheat proved by physical evidence, inter alia, end of story.
     
  20. jonnythan

    jonnythan Professional

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2009
    Messages:
    1,356
    I'm not deciding what terminology should be in use. I'm just pointing out the fact that something you said is 100% false.

    No one has ever produced any samples that "show he's a drug cheat."
     
  21. Bartelby

    Bartelby G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2005
    Messages:
    12,977
    I said something that is completely true.

    He's a drug cheat and there's physical evidence that he has tested positive for drug cheating.

    USADA does not use the word positive for good scientific reasons.

    The words that it does use add up to drug cheat.
     
  22. jonnythan

    jonnythan Professional

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2009
    Messages:
    1,356
    I'm sure you've said many things that are completely true.

    However, the problem is that you've also said things that are completely false :p
     
  23. Bartelby

    Bartelby G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2005
    Messages:
    12,977
    There's unchallenged physical evidence and he's been found guilty, but you're free to believe in gods, unicorns or whatever else pleases you.
     
  24. jonnythan

    jonnythan Professional

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2009
    Messages:
    1,356
    Well, according to some French TV news program.

    I notice you went from claiming "the USADA says it has positive samples" to the much more vague "there's physical evidence." Certainly no one can say that this is definitely false, but it's also not definitely true. If there is any actual physical evidence, it has not been presented yet.

    So it's possible that there's physical evidence. But we don't know. That means you don't know either. So while you're not flat-out lying, you're stating as fact things that have not yet been presented.
     
  25. Bartelby

    Bartelby G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2005
    Messages:
    12,977
    You're repeating yourself and making up your own terms, yet again, as I said you can invent your own fantasy house and live in it happily.
     
  26. jonnythan

    jonnythan Professional

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2009
    Messages:
    1,356
    I am repeating myself, because you keep repeating the same lies. You seem to change them slightly every post, but the gist of it remains the same.

    You keep saying there's physical evidence against Armstrong in the form of failed drug tests. There are not. There may be eventually, but the USADA has not said they have any and they have not produced any.

    You can say it over and over, but that doesn't make it true. Accusing the people pointing out your falsehoods of "repeating themselves" is laughable when you keep telling the same lies.
     
  27. Avles

    Avles Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2009
    Messages:
    1,505
    Location:
    The Peak of Good Living
    I think focusing on whether Armstrong actually failed drug tests is like focusing on whether the glove fit OJ or not. It's a red herring.

    The point is that there is overwhelming non-physical evidence that Armstrong doped. Nine independent sources corroborating one another is a lot of evidence. IMO it absolutely defies credulity to believe that all of those teammates are part of some grand conspiracy to falsely accuse Armstrong of doping.

    To me, the probability that Armstrong didn't dope looks vanishingly small. Whether that vanishingly small probability technically exists or not should really only matter to Lance's lawyers, if anyone.

    As far as I'm concerned Lance can keep his trophies if he wants to admire how shiny they are on his shelf. They won't change the fact that his reputation is irreversibly tarnished.
     
  28. adventure

    adventure Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2011
    Messages:
    509
    You have got to be the laziest schmuck on the planet. You have the energy to troll this thread non stop but not enough to do a 5 second internet search on this topic which will give you several days of reading material and evidence.
     
  29. adventure

    adventure Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2011
    Messages:
    509
    Nope, he said he gained "no unfair advantage" from doping. What do you suppose that means? Does that sound like a denial to you?

    He has the RIGHT and the OBLIGATION to step forward and defend his name against TEN teammates who claim he had access to the most advanced doping and who regularly discussed and watched each other doping.

    Anyone with a SHRED of credibility would be RACING to this tribunal to COMPLETELY TRASH his LYING teammates. What does Lance say? It's not worth his time. It's not worth his time? When your NAME AND LEGACY are on the line? If NOW is not the time when will it ever be? He's guilty.
     
  30. adventure

    adventure Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2011
    Messages:
    509
    That leaves the small problem of the tens of millions of dollars in prize money he stole from cycling and it's sponsors.

     
  31. jonnythan

    jonnythan Professional

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2009
    Messages:
    1,356
    I'm pretty good at Google, and the USADA has never claimed to have samples from Lance that have tested positive for anything. If you have some insider knowledge that they do have this, let the rest of us in on it.
     
  32. adventure

    adventure Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2011
    Messages:
    509
    WRONG! Again, your laziness is your worst enemy. His positive samples have already been reported and are in USADA's possession. FAIL.
     
  33. jonnythan

    jonnythan Professional

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2009
    Messages:
    1,356
    Maybe if you say it a few more times it will become true.
     
  34. adventure

    adventure Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2011
    Messages:
    509
    You don't even have the slightest clue what 'tainted blood' means in relation to pro cycling. Stop talking out of your a--.
     
  35. adventure

    adventure Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2011
    Messages:
    509
    Not at all, I just want you to keep defending Lance as often as possible. The bigger the ego, the greater the fall as they say. Keep it up.
     
  36. jonnythan

    jonnythan Professional

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2009
    Messages:
    1,356
    I'm educated enough to understand that no doping agency is in possession of samples from Lance's victory days that test positive for PEDs.

    Or, if they do have any, they aren't saying anything about them.
     
  37. fundrazer

    fundrazer Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2010
    Messages:
    1,817
    I have been enjoying Tyler's book so far. Here's one of the tidbits that has already been mentioned here:

    "In 2005, as part of a retrospective study by the Cjatenay-Malabry French National doping-detection lab to improve their methods, urine tests from the 1999 Tour de France were tested for EPO. Using the six-digit rider identification number, L'Equipe reporter Damien Ressiot established that fifteen samples belonged to Armstrong. Of the fifteen samples, 6 tested positive for EPO, including those taken after the prologue, and stages 1,9,10,12, and 14; in addition several others showed the presence of artificial EPO in levels too low to trigger a positive test. All samples taken after stage 14 tested negative.

    Aromstrong argued that the samples may have been tampered with. But according to Dr. Michael Ashenden, one of the world's most famous doping experts, the odds of someone successfully tampering with the samples to achieve this precise spiking and tailing effect would be beyond astronomical; in fact, he's now aware of any lab equipment that is calibrated to such a degree. As Ashenden summed up" There is no doubt in my mind that Lance Armstrong took EPO during the '99 Tour""

    I believe 1999 is also the year Lanced tested positive for cortocoids at the Tour.
     
  38. FastFreddy

    FastFreddy Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2008
    Messages:
    755
    give it up who r u Lance.

    Lance is done get over it! His hstory of cheating is erased end of story. Even Eddie from Maiden said he will save him a seat in HELL.
     
  39. NLBwell

    NLBwell Legend

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2004
    Messages:
    7,178
    Not saying he wouldn't have had an advantage due to better doping, but that if it was unofficially acknowledged and prevalent, everyone else had the same opportunity to be the best doper - of course taking the risk that a test would turn up positive and their name would have been ruined.

    Really stupid way to run a sport, though, where the competition is who can be the best doper and everyone knows it.
     
  40. fundrazer

    fundrazer Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2010
    Messages:
    1,817
    What most people don't understand is the fact that these doping methods don't have the same effect on everybody. Everybody's body responds differently, but with that said, to be a champion still requires a hell of a lot of training.

    Tylers book uses an example involving EPO. Tyler'ss natural hematocrit is 42, meaning if he raised it to 50, this would add 19% more oxygen-carrying red blood cells.

    Another rider with a hematocrit of something like 48, would only add 4% more red blood cells.

    *50 is a significant number, because it is the UCI's limit on hematocrit.
     
  41. Bartelby

    Bartelby G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2005
    Messages:
    12,977
    You're positively addicted to the word positive because you know the official terminology is 'consistent with' because for technical reasons its ludicrous to talk about positive versus negative, so you keep on trying to use the word positive

    - a word that has positively no use in some current testing protocols.

    In normal speak, he did test positive for illegal drug use or cheating.

    In official speak, his results were 'consistent with' drug use or cheating.




     
  42. jonnythan

    jonnythan Professional

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2009
    Messages:
    1,356
    "Consistent with" does not mean "positive test." I'm sorry you want it to so badly.
     
  43. Bartelby

    Bartelby G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2005
    Messages:
    12,977
    I'm sorry but science does not speak your language, but you'll always have your faith.
     
  44. NonP

    NonP Professional

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2009
    Messages:
    1,194
    I don't see how the problem (if you view it as such) can be fixed, though. The dopers have historically kept ahead of the authorities. What do we have in place now that will somehow reverse this trend?

    This is one of the reasons why I'm sympathetic to the idea that they should just let the athletes take whatever they want, but of course it presents its own set of problems.
     
  45. Benhur

    Benhur Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2007
    Messages:
    2,562
    The last few days the press has carried these statements by UCI's boss Pat McQuaid. They ALL precede it by big headlines saying that UCI will not appeal. Except that's not actually what McQaid is saying. All he said is they are waiting to see the case USADA is supposed to provide them, and unless they see reasons to appeal, they won't. (USADA hasn't provided the case file to UCI yet).

    You have to love how all the headlines say that UCI will not appeal. It's quite a concerted interpretation.

    http://tinyurl.com/9sulpkk

    Here is what McQuaid actually said (from the Reuters report on the Reuters page)

    The UCI has no reason to assume that a full case file does not exist. They (USADA) have a full case file so let them provide the full case file," McQuaid told Reuters by telephone.

    "And unless the USADA's decision and case file give serious reasons to do otherwise, the UCI has no intention to appeal to CAS (Court of Arbitration for Sport) or not to recognize the USADA's sanctions on Lance Armstrong."

    However, the UCI is still waiting for USADA's reasoned decision and the case file it requested.

    "We need to examine the decision and the file in order to deal with it properly and this is going to take some time. However, I can assure you that this will be prioritized," the Irishman said.

    "The reason the UCI is seeking the file is that we want to provide a timely response and not delay matters any further than necessary. The sooner we receive the full decision and case file the sooner we can provide its response."

    Should the reasoned decision and the case file come to the UCI within two weeks as he expects, McQuaid said they could be examined at the governing body's management committee on September 19-20.

    McQuaid also wants to look into the riders who allegedly have testified against Armstrong in exchange for a reduced sentence on past doping offences.

    "The UCI assumes that the decision and file will also detail the sanction the USADA may wish to enforce upon the riders who have provided testimony in exchange for reduced sanctions," he said.

    McQuaid addressed former Armstrong team mate Tyler Hamilton's book, "The Secret Race: Inside the Hidden World of the Tour de France: Doping, Cover-ups and Winning at All Costs", in which the American reiterates a claim that Armstrong had failed a dope test in 2001 but that it was covered up by the UCI.

    "There is nothing new. There was no cover up in 2001 and we see no evidence to support such allegation," he said.

    McQuaid also asked the USADA to provide the UCI with three Garmin-Barracuda riders' files after their own team manager Jonathan Vaughters hinted this month that they had doped earlier in their careers.

    "We need to see if Jonathan Vaughter's accusations have any substance so we can see if we take action against these riders," said McQuaid.
     
  46. fundrazer

    fundrazer Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2010
    Messages:
    1,817
  47. Bartelby

    Bartelby G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2005
    Messages:
    12,977
    From the above link.


    UCI took money from a drug cheat to buy a machine to analyse blood samples!:



    The UCI has altered its stance on the case, first stating that the matter was for USADA to deal with before bringing a case to a US court where they fought for but failed to attain jurisdiction of results management. They await the evidence from USADA, which has yet to be made public, while Armstrong chose not to fight charges leveled at him.

    "There is a big effort needed in this historic situation in cycling to really change the sport. I doubt that McQuaid has the credibility to lead the reform that is needed," Schenk told Cyclingnews.

    Schenk has previously called for an independent inquiry into the UCI's actions after it was confirmed in 2010 that they received donations from Lance Armstrong during the rider's career. The money was used to purchase a machine to analyze blood samples.

    Although Schenk said that she had never been a witness of covering-up a positive test result during her time in the UCI management committee (from 2000 to 2005) she has raised concerns over the payments made by Armstrong, and in her opinion cites them as an example of how the UCI's credibility is undermined.
     
  48. Sander001

    Sander001 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2012
    Messages:
    2,524
    Location:
    In the place where there is no darkness.
    You know you're incompetent when there's new legislation aimed directly at you. And in these days of extreme partisanship, it takes a lot for Democrats and Republicans to agree on something and work together but they are, such is the deficiency of USADA.

    http://www.usatoday.com/sports/cycl...men-introduce-bill-to-reform-usada/57821062/1
     
  49. Bartelby

    Bartelby G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2005
    Messages:
    12,977
    Lance and Poe:

    A mordant humour sometimes frames the shooting up and downbeat cheating. In his team they named EPO after Edgar Allan Poe, a novelist of mystery whose final words on his deathbed were reputedly: "Lord, help my poor soul." If they usually called their performance-enhancing drug of choice "Edgar", being on first-name terms with EPO, Hamilton claims to have also asked Armstrong a simple question about "Poe". They were in Armstrong's villa in Nice, in the spring of 1999, preparing for the Tour de France – and the first of his seven wins.

    "Hey dude, you got any Poe I can borrow?" Hamilton supposedly asked Armstrong. "Lance pointed casually to the fridge," Hamilton writes. "I opened it and there, on the door, next to a carton of milk was a carton of EPO, each stoppered vial standing upright, little soldiers in their cardboard cells. I was surprised that Lance would be so cavalier." Unlike Hamilton and other paranoid members of the peloton, "Lance acted like he was invulnerable."



    Lance got the UCI to stop a rival:

    One of Hamilton's most serious allegations in his book is that the UCI not only did so little to combat doping but that he was summoned to their headquarters and given a quiet warning about his blood-test results after he out-climbed Armstrong on Mont Ventoux during the Dauphiné Libéré classic in 2004. Floyd Landis, who has since also admitted to doping, apparently told Hamilton that "Lance called the UCI on you … and said … you were on some new ****." Hamilton confronted Armstrong – who denied the allegation.
     
  50. fundrazer

    fundrazer Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2010
    Messages:
    1,817
    Yep, I remember reading those bits from Tyler's book. Apparently Lance has also "called the UCI" on quite a few other riders.

    I was reading on another forum that big George Hincapie might be making a statement sometime this week.
     

Share This Page