Armstrong charged and banned

[Chuffy]

Tangential to the thread topic (not sure it merits a thread of its own) - good interview with JV, following up his NYT piece.

 

[Red Light]

to summarise is the only evidence an x colleague saying he doped?

Seems like it. From the USADA letter linked above by Yello:

Where, as here, the charges are based on witness evidence rather than laboratory analysis of samples........

 

[Slaav]

Although very interested in the detail and the opinion of people with far more knowledge than I do, I can safely say that the law 'can' be an ass!

Sometimes it really does not matter who or what is correct; it so many times boils down to who has the best lawyer or slimiest retards on their team who are prepared to lie, cheat and duck and dive better than the others.

Wrong and justice (although mostly) is sometimes a side show. Not sure what camp I come down on though but must say that if it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck and even looks like a duck......

 

[yello]

it so many times boils down to who has the best lawyer or slimiest retards on their team who are prepared to lie, cheat and duck and dive better than the others.

One of the things I like about the USADA process, and such arbitration services generally, is that they seemingly can't be got to. They operate in their own protected space with their own rules (and I know same have concerns about that). Courts will respect and protect that, and are very very reluctant to interfere.

Unlike law courts, where deep pockets and crafty lawyers can clog the mechanism, the arbitration process is streamlined and laid out, a step-by-step process that has to be followed to conclusion. There's a very simple beauty to it all. And in this case perhaps, the mouse that roars.

 

[raindog]

Tangential to the thread topic (not sure it merits a thread of its own) - good interview with JV, following up his NYT piece.

thanks for that Chuffy, that's a very interesting interview

there's a great response in there to the people who say "make peds legal, then we'll have a level playing field"

“If you make everything legal, believe me, some people are going to push things way beyond where they are now,” he argues. “Some people will say no to what is essentially suicide, so the winner is the guy who’s willing to risk his health more than anyone else.”

 

[yello]

Seems like it.

I have no idea how you came to that conclusion Red Light. For me, 'based on' does not mean 'only'.

USADA are being very coy/protective about the evidence they have but we do know from the charge letter that they have both testimony and test results (specifically, the 2009 & 2010 blood test results). Note also that the charge letter states that it references only a "portion" of the evidence gathered in USADA's investigations. So I think it save to conclude that there is more than only witness testimony.

 

[Red Light]

I have no idea how you came to that conclusion Red Light. For me, 'based on' does not mean 'only'.

It says it's based on witness statements rather than lab results, not witness statements and lab results.

 

[yello]

Tangential to the thread topic (not sure it merits a thread of its own) - good interview with JV, following up his NYT piece.

Cheers, that gives me something to read this afternoon! JV appeared briefly in The Clinic if you want to wade through the JV thread to find his contributions. I think he was sort of paving the way (for himself too) and gauging reaction, as it was both before and after his NYT article.

For myself, I did think his NYT piece was emotive - perhaps too big on ideals and short of suggestion, but an excellent opening gambit. I'm hoping he can follow up with ideas as we know he has them. I was encouraged by this remark of his (from the 1st page of the article, which I skimmed)...

Frankly, I won’t be happy or feel better until I see that it’s done something to change the environment

So clearly he feels the environment needs changing. That seems a little different to his (as I see it) public attitude of 'understand, learn, move on'. Maybe he sees a change on the horizon?

 

[yello]

It says it's based on witness statements rather than lab results, not witness statements and lab results.

Do you think 'based on' means 'only'? And are you ignoring what it explicitly states in the charge letter?

 

[Red Light]

Do you think 'based on' means 'only'? And are you ignoring what it explicitly states in the charge letter?

If you look up the conjunction form of "rather than" you will find it means "and not" according to most dictionaries including the main US dictionary, Merriam-Websters. Whatever it says in the charge letter this is the USADA's response to the Judge's request for clarification.

 

[yello]

That JV article that Chuffy linked too is well worth reading. It owes a great deal to Joe Lindsey, the interviewer/reporter.

JV is an idealist, without doubt. I like that. Personally, I feel you have to aim for ideals even if you also accept that you'll never quite get there.

It's notable that there's no questions or quotes re USPS years. In the context of the USADA investigation and of the nature of the interview, that's telling. I think we can conclude that JV is one of those who have offered testimony. He personally stands to potentially loose a deal, as he points out, so it's a brave thing to do. Respect.

I didn't realise that distrust and dislike of UCI ran as deep within the teams and the peloton as JV seems to suggest. It feels like he wants to say 'corrupt' but can't quite bring himself to. Unpopular tours that exist for the UCI coffers etc. Pretty harsh words for organisers too.

But, of all, I think this is what I personally was looking for....

Since the 1998 Festina scandal (and likely before) there has been a tremendous resistance to uncovering the sport’s past. Do we need to? Is it possible to simply draw a line and forget what came before, to start anew without some kind of mass confession?

Vaughters doesn’t believe it’s possible. “You’re two thirds of the way through a dark tunnel; backing up is not an option,” he says, citing the scandals, positive tests, and many admissions so far.

 

[ufkacbln]

Wrong and justice (although mostly) is sometimes a side show. Not sure what camp I come down on though but must say that if it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck and even looks like a duck......

 

[oldroadman]

This thread. Opinions and heresay. JV confesses - why - a deal and testify against his "old mate". Let's just keep dragging up things about a bad time in the sport, until there are no sponsors, no races, and it's wrecked. Funny you don't hear about what happened in baseball and US football from USADA.

 

[ufkacbln]

This thread. Opinions and heresay. JV confesses - why - a deal and testify against his "old mate". Let's just keep dragging up things about a bad time in the sport, until there are no sponsors, no races, and it's wrecked. Funny you don't hear about what happened in baseball and US football from USADA.

The NFL opted out of the WADA / USADA system.

 

[Flying_Monkey]

This thread. Opinions and heresay. JV confesses - why - a deal and testify against his "old mate". Let's just keep dragging up things about a bad time in the sport, until there are no sponsors, no races, and it's wrecked. Funny you don't hear about what happened in baseball and US football from USADA.

Wit respect, ORM, it is not about the past or just about cycling. Armstrong is trying to make a second professional racing career in triathlon. If he had retired quietly, I don't think USADA would care. And personally, as a triathlete, I am very pleased USADA has taken this action before triathlon gets mired in a similar mess that characterized cycle racing in the EPO era.

Also - see what Cunobelin says about top American pro-sports - USADA would love to get their teeth into them, but they simply don't care because they make enough money in the USA not to worry about how the rest of the world thinks of them.