Armstrong charged and banned

[Red Light]

Some more info about USADA's evidence
http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/i...ood-attempt-convict-cheater-article-1.1113450

I would love one of our resident statisticians to comment on those numbers. If its accepted that his levels fluctuate normally between 40 and 43 and being 1.8 under the lower figure is considered not unusual, why is being 2.7 above the upper figure proof of doping? And was the 1.8 low figure evidence that LA was taking drugs to depress his performance?

It says he was at high altitude during that period but also its known that athletes lift their haemocrit levels by living at high altitude or by sleeping in low oxygen atmospheres so what is the effect of that? Its one of the reasons the chemical test for EPO was introduced because the use of haemocrit thresholds was so controversial and discredited because of variability in natural levels and environmental influences.

Someone cycling down the road on a bike would be fully consistent with the rider having stolen it. Does that mean we are all bike thieves here?

 

[Red Light]

It isn't just about the credibility of drug tests. If enough reliable witnesses come forward to claim they saw Armstrong doping then that alone could be regarded as sufficient proof, similarly to a criminal investigation into a murder where there is no forensic evidence but plenty of eye witnesses who swear they saw X shoot Y.

It will be interesting to see who exactly has testified against Lance. Aren't relations with his ex wife a bit fraught?

The issue of witnesses is must be both reliable and independent. Many of the witnesses so far have severe reliability issues and none of them are what could be classed as disinterested parties. Its the equivalent in your analogy of a gang shooting and the statements by gang members as to who fired the shot in the absence of any forensic evidence.

 

[Alun]

Someone cycling down the road on a bike would be fully consistent with the rider having stolen it. Does that mean we are all bike thieves here?

Or as the USADA would say:
"fully consistent with the rider having stolen it or borrowed it or both borrowed it and stolen it"

 

[Flying_Monkey]

False analogy. But do keep trying.

 

[Red Light]

False analogy. But do keep trying.

Proof by assertion. Do keep not explaining.

 

[Alun]

If Armstrongs blood tests in 2010 were "fully consistent with blood manipulation including EPO use and/or blood transfusions" why was his performance in the 2010 TdF so crap?

 

[Chuffy]

If Armstrongs blood tests in 2010 were "fully consistent with blood manipulation including EPO use and/or blood transfusions" why was his performance in the 2010 TdF so crap?

He was another year older and kept falling off?

 

[Chuffy]

The issue of witnesses is must be both reliable and independent. Many of the witnesses so far have severe reliability issues and none of them are what could be classed as disinterested parties. Its the equivalent in your analogy of a gang shooting and the statements by gang members as to who fired the shot in the absence of any forensic evidence.

So who would qualify as a reliable and independent witness, in your opinion?

 

[Alun]

He was another year older and kept falling off?

He was not performing well before he started falling off, and to go from 3rd in 2009 to 64th in 2010 is a bigger drop than most riders experience in 12 months.

 

[yello]

Just as an interesting diversion, we've often heard the 'Armstrong has been tested over 500* times and never tested positive' line. That number has been hotly contested by many. Ever wondered how many tests it actually was? Well, read on....

http://www.cyclismas.com/2012/07/the-legend-of-the-500/

I'll cut to the chase.... 236 times is the number the above article comes up with. There's also info on the positives tests.

*600 allowing for inflation.

 

[User169]

Just as an interesting diversion, we've often heard the 'Armstrong has been tested over 500* times and never tested positive' line. That number has been hotly contested by many. Ever wondered how many tests it actually was? Well, read on....

http://www.cyclismas.com/2012/07/the-legend-of-the-500/

I'll cut to the chase.... 236 times is the number the above article comes up with. There's also info on the positives tests.

*600 allowing for inflation.

Very confusing that Armstrong's lawyer is called "Tim Herman". I keep reading "Tim Henman".

I would have thought the sanctions for giving factually incorrect statement to the court are fairly draconian, so I guess there must be some logic on which the numbers can be justified.

 

[Red Light]

So who would qualify as a reliable and independent witness, in your opinion?

Someone who has a track record of being a truthful and accurate witness of events for the reliable bit and someone who has no personal interest, direct or indirect, in the outcome.

 

[Chuffy]

Someone who has a track record of being a truthful and accurate witness of events for the reliable bit

And how would this be assessed? Are there accreditation schemes for witnesses? Would witnesses only be accepted if they have a reliability score of 75% or more? The reliability and standing of the witness is down to whoever hears the evidence, be that a judge, a panel or a jury.

and someone who has no personal interest, direct or indirect, in the outcome.

Again, the motivation of a witness and the potential impact on their evidence is up to whoever is hearing the case. You are effectively ruling out anyone with a connection to the events they witnessed.

You are talking complete horse toffee.

 

[Chuffy]

Very confusing that Armstrong's lawyer is called "Tim Herman". I keep reading "Tim Henman".

They'll both go down in history as being famous for losing, so the names may as well be interchangeable.

 

[ufkacbln]

There is still the issue of reliability of the tests.

The test for EPO has been shown to have a high false positive rate in people who have undergone exercise.