Armstrong charged and banned

[ufkacbln]

I find it strange that the Armstrong apologists seem to think that those of us who have been vocal in condemning all riders who dope always seem to think we in someway 'target' Armstrong - there is no targetting other than he is the most vocal in his denials and is the biggest dope cheat of them all. And that is not to say we do not recognise that he is but part of the problem - but unless he and others come clean then we can never find out the true extent of the problem (including chaperones, who would be under the instruction of far more powerful and influential people, e.g. Armstrong's cronies to turn a blind eye)

So get the feck over yourselves and Armstrong. If you cannot see the full picture, which includes Armstrong and his ilk, then you cannot fully contribute to any debate. Denying Armstrong's part in it and wanting to point fingers elsewhere is not gonna add anything. Accept he was one of the biggest dopers and traffcikers, one of the most influential people in ensuring the Omerta was maintained and that he benefitted finanically within and outwith the sport due to his cheating...and then we can move on to "the others". Unlike Armstrong who is not interested in the sport, we are.

I have expereinced this kind of bulls*** for years when I have brought up individual riders and their dodgy practices, and the apologists always use the same arguments - now we have something of more substance and they still hold the same line. I can only assume that they are very shallow, needy individuals who have very little self-worth or self-awareness and live their lives within a very narrow field of understanding, and certainly devoid of a sense of charcater and values.

I'm more than happy to get stuck into the UCI, team managers, team staff, etc...maybe Hamilton's book will give us more to go on - but I suspect the fanboys will merely claim he is embittered, unreliable, never that good anyway, etc. The same old pish that has been spouted for, what seems like, forever.

Which is exactly the point.

Armstrong in many ways has been a mask for reality.

However the problem with Armstrong is a two way street.

I chose the testing notification as an example with good reason.

The entire press story has taken what is a widespread practice and made it unique to Armstrong

A serious and relevant point then becomes mired down as part of the "Armstrong debate" and gets none of the wider spread circulation and examination that it really deserves.

That is the real danger here.

We really need to move away from personalising this issue and looking at the system, dismissing this as trying to point the finger elsewhere and apologist could not be further from the truth, it is simply a way of avoiding an unpleasant truth.

The real truth is that at the time drugs in cycling were rife and the whole subject is at the moment a very large and securely locked very dark box of secrets

We should really be looking at Armstrong as the key to opening that box then investigating the contents rather than just commenting on the key and missing that opportunity.

 

[yello]

We should really be looking at Armstrong as the key to opening that box then investigating the contents rather than just commenting on the key and missing that opportunity.

With all due respect, I think that is what is happening.

 

[thom]

So get the feck over yourselves and Armstrong. If you cannot see the full picture, which includes Armstrong and his ilk, then you cannot fully contribute to any debate. Denying Armstrong's part in it and wanting to point fingers elsewhere is not gonna add anything. Accept he was one of the biggest dopers and traffcikers, one of the most influential people in ensuring the Omerta was maintained and that he benefitted finanically within and outwith the sport due to his cheating...and then we can move on to "the others". Unlike Armstrong who is not interested in the sport, we are.

It all proves Armstrong is the correct target to break the omerta. Before pointing the finger elsewhere, you need to see an Armstrong apologist accepting that important point.

 

[ufkacbln]

With all due respect, I think that is what is happening.

For some, but not all.

 

[PaulB]

Seriously, I did not communicate with PaulB whilst I was writing my earlier reply

But this reply proves my point perfectly....

Yes, there are those who want it all their own way. They want their cake and eat it. Those who have nailed their colours to the mast will seek out any confirmation bias and use it as corroborative evidence. I think most reasonable, rational people accept Armstrong's guilt and dismiss anything that runs contrary to that view while the Armstrong fan-boys are the exact opposite. So why set any store by Hamilton's book when his word has to be treated with scepticism and he has a financial interest in 'giving them juice'? There are many books on the subject from more reliable sources than this.

 

[thom]

For some, but not all.

Agreed. I think you can see people who are interested in doing so commenting on a thread different to the "Armstrong charged and banned" thread here:
http://www.cyclechat.net/threads/reforming-the-uci.109762/

 

[ufkacbln]

Agreed. I think you can see people who are interested in doing so commenting on a thread different to the "Armstrong charged and banned" thread here:
http://www.cyclechat.net/threads/reforming-the-uci.109762/

Again though that was becoming down to the investigating the actions of a few and speculation. There is the problem that once again it becomes personalised and this masks the true reality

This is really "old news" in that the events happened some time ago.

Rather than speculate, or guess, why not simply sit back for 6 months, open the box, take time to look at the contents and then have an informed and full investigation.

Which of course leads to the question as to who should investigate. All of the present organisations, WADA, USADA, UCI are all in some way tarnished and too close to be independent

 

[Red Light]

I find it strange that the Armstrong apologists seem to think that those of us who have been vocal in condemning all riders who dope always seem to think we in someway 'target' Armstrong - there is no targetting other than he is the most vocal in his denials and is the biggest dope cheat of them all. And that is not to say we do not recognise that he is but part of the problem - but unless he and others come clean then we can never find out the true extent of the problem (including chaperones, who would be under the instruction of far more powerful and influential people, e.g. Armstrong's cronies to turn a blind eye)

So get the feck over yourselves and Armstrong. If you cannot see the full picture, which includes Armstrong and his ilk, then you cannot fully contribute to any debate. Denying Armstrong's part in it and wanting to point fingers elsewhere is not gonna add anything. Accept he was one of the biggest dopers and traffcikers, one of the most influential people in ensuring the Omerta was maintained and that he benefitted finanically within and outwith the sport due to his cheating...and then we can move on to "the others". Unlike Armstrong who is not interested in the sport, we are.

I have expereinced this kind of bulls*** for years when I have brought up individual riders and their dodgy practices, and the apologists always use the same arguments - now we have something of more substance and they still hold the same line. I can only assume that they are very shallow, needy individuals who have very little self-worth or self-awareness and live their lives within a very narrow field of understanding, and certainly devoid of a sense of charcater and values.

I'm more than happy to get stuck into the UCI, team managers, team staff, etc...maybe Hamilton's book will give us more to go on - but I suspect the fanboys will merely claim he is embittered, unreliable, never that good anyway, etc. The same old pish that has been spouted for, what seems like, forever.

And what the Armstrong lynch mob fail to understand is that as of today we have little further information on Armstrong and what he did or didn't do on which to hang him than we did a year ago. The evidence that USADA have is not published yet so we don't know who it is and what they have said and until we do its pure speculation as to what the case is against him. Some of us including UCI and ASO are waiting for that information before making a judgement but that has not stopped the lynch mob here stringing him up and anything associated with him at the same time. Now of course the lynch mob in their defence have always been convinced, evidence or not, that he is guilty and after the deep disappointment that the FBI and FDA found insufficient evidence for a prosecution of someone "so obviously guilty" after spending $40m and interviewing witnesses under sub-poena and oath, its not surprising they are trigger happy on this morsel of hope.

I am not pro-Armstrong, I am not anti-Armstrong but I am very strongly pro proper process and not finding people guilty before the evidence has been seen and considered. In this case we are not going to get the benefit of a hearing and cross examination of the witnesses but I still want to see what the basis for the USADA case is and whether its repetition of the same tired old claims (which is all that has surfaced in the press so far) or genuinely new credible evidence. At present all we have is USADA hearsay that they have spoken to witnesses that have testified against him but we don't know what they said or who said it and it is no more valid than Phil Liggetts hearsay that someone was offered money to testify until names and times and faces are put on it so it becomes testimony not hearsay.

Personally I think its unlikely that he won the TdeF seven times beating known drug cheats of the ability of Ulrich, Kloden and Basso without being on the same enhancers as they were but I am prepared to give him the benefit of the doubt until I see the new evidence and even then would need to see strong evidence of behaviour much more sinister than just doping to treat him more harshly than the rest of the top of the TdeF peleton of those years has been treated for their doping.

But enjoy your lynch mob party because you don't need evidence to have an excuse to hang someone you don't like.

 

[Chuffy]

There are many books on the subject from more reliable sources than this.

Oooh, more books from USPS insiders telling all about the organised doping that went on? Excellent! Please point me towards them, I wish to go shopping.

 

[Crackle]

I wouldn't mind if there was - the guy's always given me the creeps.

But doesn't anyone else find this super-depressing? Talk about being taken for a ride, we've been well and truly shafted for twenty years. I seriously feel like packing up watching the sport. With EPO bike racing has shot itself in the foot big time.

Disappointing, not quite depressing. You only need to look in the Clinic to see what the consequences of this are, a hard edged cynicism amongst those who follow the sport, sod the sponsors, it's the fans who are the most screwed up by this, those who follow the racing I mean.

I'm hoping that the creditable performances we are seeing now is at least an indication that things might be changing but if it turns out not to be, then I think I'll quit following.

 

[ufkacbln]

I used to take banned substances as a supporter!

In the days of the coverage being at obscure hours of the day and night than alcohol and caffeine were staples!

 

[mickle]

And what the Armstrong lynch mob fail to understand is that as of today we have little further information on Armstrong and what he did or didn't do on which to hang him than we did a year ago. The evidence that USADA have is not published yet so we don't know who it is and what they have said and until we do its pure speculation as to what the case is against him. Some of us including UCI and ASO are waiting for that information before making a judgement but that has not stopped the lynch mob here stringing him up and anything associated with him at the same time. Now of course the lynch mob in their defence have always been convinced, evidence or not, that he is guilty and after the deep disappointment that the FBI and FDA found insufficient evidence for a prosecution of someone "so obviously guilty" after spending $40m and interviewing witnesses under sub-poena and oath, its not surprising they are trigger happy on this morsel of hope.

I am not pro-Armstrong, I am not anti-Armstrong but I am very strongly pro proper process and not finding people guilty before the evidence has been seen and considered. In this case we are not going to get the benefit of a hearing and cross examination of the witnesses but I still want to see what the basis for the USADA case is and whether its repetition of the same tired old claims (which is all that has surfaced in the press so far) or genuinely new credible evidence. At present all we have is USADA hearsay that they have spoken to witnesses that have testified against him but we don't know what they said or who said it and it is no more valid than Phil Liggetts hearsay that someone was offered money to testify until names and times and faces are put on it so it becomes testimony not hearsay.

Personally I think its unlikely that he won the TdeF seven times beating known drug cheats of the ability of Ulrich, Kloden and Basso without being on the same enhancers as they were but I am prepared to give him the benefit of the doubt until I see the new evidence and even then would need to see strong evidence of behaviour much more sinister than just doping to treat him more harshly than the rest of the top of the TdeF peleton of those years has been treated for their doping.

But enjoy your lynch mob party because you don't need evidence to have an excuse to hang someone you don't like.

I'm struggling to understand what you and Cunobelin are on about.

'... all we have is USADA hearsay that they have spoken to witnesses that have testified against him but we don't know what they said or who said it and it is no more valid than Phil Liggetts hearsay...

Srsly? The evidence accumulated by the United States Anti-Doping Agency (and the testimony of a dozen former colleagues) is no more valid than the uninformed, ignorant witterings of a half pissed TV commentator?

 

[Red Light]

But doesn't anyone else find this super-depressing? Talk about being taken for a ride, we've been well and truly shafted for twenty years. I seriously feel like packing up watching the sport. With EPO bike racing has shot itself in the foot big time.

Its always been that way (not that it excuses it) and probably always will be. Given that Armstrong had 500 or whatever the number of tests was and they didn't find anything in all but perhaps one or two, you really have to ask if the sport - and all other sports - are clean now or just ahead still of the testers. And whether the authorities are better off catching up with their testing than chasing down "cold cases"

There is an interesting blog on it here which includes this picture from a French magazine article of the 1930s.

 

[Chuffy]

I'm struggling to understand what you and Cunobelin are on about.

'... all we have is USADA hearsay that they have spoken to witnesses that have testified against him but we don't know what they said or who said it and it is no more valid than Phil Liggetts hearsay...

Srsly? The evidence accumulated by the United States Anti-Doping Agency (and the testimony of a dozen former colleagues) is no more valid than the uninformed, ignorant witterings of a half pissed TV commentator?

I think you'll find that if you strip out the moronic drivel from apologists and those people incapable of reading, this thread shrinks down to about 60 pages.

 

[mickle]

Its always been that way (not that it excuses it) and probably always will be. Given that Armstrong had 500 or whatever the number of tests was and they didn't find anything in all but perhaps one or two, you really have to ask if the sport - and all other sports - are clean now or just ahead still of the testers. And whether the authorities are better off catching up with their testing than chasing down "cold cases"

There is an interesting blog on it here which includes this picture from a French magazine article of the 1930s.

You've not been keeping up, Armstong has done no more than 250 tests. And probably fewer.