Armstrong charged and banned

[marinyork]

Your definition of 'fringe' is obviously slightly more 'fringe' than mine is. The 7-Eleven team was riding the TdF from 1986 and had a good profile in the US, as did cycling in general through the 80s/90s. Nine American cycling medals at the LA Olympics in 84. Like I said, it might not have been the NFL or NBA, but it simply wasn't 'fringe' in the way you are describing it.

Not sure how olympic medals in a single one off games (five of them were on the track in particular) shows a big interest in cycling. The US won no olympic medals in 1980 (obviously) and 1976 and 1972 and infact you have to go back to the very early days of the olympics in 1912 before you find another US olympic cycling medal winner. Nor did they follow the success of their home games up with just 1 medal in 1988. Of course your argument in a sense is dishonest as I suspect you know perfectly well that the countries that boycotted the 1984 games were traditionally decent cycling countries in the 70s at the olympics. Funnily enough by amazing coincidence the US's number of medals shrank back down in 1988, I wonder why . Then in 1992 at the olympics the medals have followed a different pattern. Apart from that the 1984 US cycling team is famous for doping.

Apart from that the idea that olympic medals means interest in (track) cycling is not something I see. If that had applied here in the past we'd be sorted.

 

[smutchin]

The belief is on both sides. Nobody here has seen any of the evidence USADA has yet people are convinced of his absolute guilt or his innocence already and many were already convinced before any of the USADA stuff blew up in the first place. Personally I am reserving judgement until the evidence is released and we can see it for ourselves. But until then I continue with the innocent until proven guilty stance. At the moment he has a default judgement and is technically guilty but any evidence has yet been weighed and judged.

I've never seen an electron. I only have the word of so-called "scientists" that such things exist. Why should I take their word for it? I refuse to believe in "electrons" until I've seen one with my own eyes.

d.

 

[yello]

Sun Times reviews Armstrong 'liar and cheat' libel payout​

Doesn't surprise me in the least.

I think they'd actually hang fire before re-opening until USADA releases the evidence though. Possibly even until UCI/ASO ratifies the decision - which they will in time.

 

[Boris Bajic]

Not sure what that proves - other than the fact that you perhaps didn't follow cycling as closely as you thought you did.

Armstrong was not an 'unknown' to anyone who followed cycling in the early 90s. It's impossible to prove a negative in this context, so there's no point trying.

I'm not trying to prove anything and I'm certainly not trying to get into a willy-measuring competition about how much or how little I followed cycling in the early 90s. A lifelong follower of Arsenal, I'm still told frequently by more ardent followers that I don't hate Spurs enough to be a true believer. That may be true.

I really did follow cycling in the early 90s (and long before) and I really would have had trouble naming L.A. in '93 if asked. I might have said "That Yank bloke". When my eldest was learning to ride in 1997 we did pretend races and we were 'Zabal & Cippolini'. No Armstrong. I always did these pretend sprint-races commentaries with my kids while they were learning to pedal (and I always lost). there was no 'Armstrong' until the youngest started riding and he asked to be him. That was 2004. He'd been tipped off by an elder sibling that Armstrong was fast. The middle kid (born '95) always wanted to be Pantani. Ooops!

I'm sure there were those who knew Armstrong and his deeds back then in '93. I was not among them. This may be because I spent the TdF weeks in France in those days and the French media did tend to concentrate on European (French) riders. I don't know.

Fame is hard to quantify.

I'm just suggesting that it is not rubbish to say that Lance was pretty much unknown in the US in 1993. He was. And apart from Armstrong, almost every pro cyclist before and since (including Lemond, Hincapie, Hamilton, Landis et al) remains so outside a small but very keen US road racing community.

 

[thom]

Doesn't surprise me in the least.

I think they'd actually hang fire before re-opening until USADA releases the evidence though. Possibly even until UCI/ASO ratifies the decision - which they will in time.

Yes I think the revelation of evidence will free up a lot of people to speak and act.
The question would be whether LA would seek to defend himself if he does get sued, what with the associated airing of evidence and explicit court judgement that he's avoided with USADA. There was a very large pay-cheque that one guarantor sought to avoid paying after one of the TdF's. Certainly it would be good for business from a news & pr point of view at the very least for the Sunday Times.

 

[DogTired]

The Foundation is not about funding research.
But perhaps you think the MacMillan nurses are a waste of money too. http://m.macmillan.org.uk/home

I love it when someone puts "But perhaps you think" and then follows up with some arbitrary tosh!

As for the Foundation not funding research - its first item on their agenda apparently:
"The Foundation is dedicated to enhancing the quality of life for those
living with, through and beyond cancer by supporting scientific research, educational community
programs and public awareness efforts."

Talking about fighting and actually fighting are 2 different things. Considering the report writing and talking the Foundation has a fantastic burn rate of cash. LAF has a lot of buzzword-compliant statements but is light on actual help for cancer sufferers.

Interesting you raise Macmillan - they provide actual health care! Real actual get-yer-hands-dirty-assistance. Not a report or education-program. They actually provide financial support too. Something LAF doesn't do.

If you have anything else, let me know. Always happy to make the effort and find the facts for you.

 

[smutchin]

The Lance Armstrong Foundation provides a lot of financial support for cancer survivors.

Well, one cancer survivor in particular.

Funny that the person who gets most financial support from the organisation should be someone who shares its name!

d.

 

[davefb]

I've never seen an electron. I only have the word of so-called "scientists" that such things exist. Why should I take their word for it? I refuse to believe in "electrons" until I've seen one with my own eyes.

d.

theres some *very* easy experiments to show a lot of the properties of one though... very easy..
though obviously you won't be able to actually see one though....

So the scientists don't just say "well they exist" , they show through evidence and repeatable experiments..

otherwise it'd be "I've got on good authority from an gamma particle that those electrons exist"

 

[thom]

A translation of the Basson article

 

[Alun]

You haven't said anything about the vacant positions in recent years. Podiums. Yes podiums. Pay attention. You actually said before that people had to be upgraded in position. Do you have any thoughts on this or are you going to keep on repeating the same things?

World War 2 is similar in many sports. However that irrelevance aside, I don't see why we simply can't have a vacant winner in the TDF with appropriate will. We've got two vacant podium places at this point in time. Once again your thoughts?

Keep your shirt on! I am not really bothered by podiums vacant or otherwise.
I didn't make the rule that says riders have to be upgraded, it is a UCI rule, you can look it up if you don't believe me. It seems to apply in the case of Armstrong, I don't see why it shouldn't be applied, obviously you do. That's fine with me!

 

[Flying_Monkey]

A really good piece on Cycling News involving Kimmage today, in which he outlines what needs to change with the UCI. Meanwhile WADA is calling for 'truth and reconciliation' - in other words the Vaughters / Slipstream way This is surely the most important course of action - we absolutely must get this right.

 

[thom]

For those who prefer to listen rather than read : http://velocastcc.squarespace.com/race-radio/2012/8/27/lance-armstrong-special-edition.html

 

[Red Light]

I've never seen an electron. I only have the word of so-called "scientists" that such things exist. Why should I take their word for it? I refuse to believe in "electrons" until I've seen one with my own eyes.

d.

That's a very healthy attitude and you should review the evidence there is for the "existence" of an electron and make your own mind up.

 

[lukesdad]

I must be missing something here ? A US agency is to determine how many times a rider has one the TDF depending on what he tells them ?

 

[Red Light]

Sun Times reviews Armstrong 'liar and cheat' libel payout​

It has ironic parallels. The "pre-trial legal wrangling between Armstrong's lawyers Schillings and the Sunday Times - including a row over whether an initial hearing to decide the meaning of the article should be heard by a judge or a jury which went all the way to the Court of Appeal" a bit like the Sparks hearing and then "Following that ruling, The Sunday Times opted to settle the case" a bit like Armstrong deciding not to contest. So presumably the Sunday Times doesn't have a leg to stand on since it conceded rather than go through the Courts.