The new improved Lance Armstrong discussion thread.*

[PpPete]

Hope you can all forgive a naive question who came to this sport rather late.
There's lots of mention in the Reasoned Decision of Kevin Livingston. I've not heard of him before. What happened to him? He doesnt seem to be amongst those who have fessed up.

 

[smutchin]

My point is its never a level playing field - money buys advantage whether its by funding better training, better team mates, better equipment, better coaches......

That's professional sport for you. It's one of the reasons I've mostly lost interest in football. Unfortunately, cycling does seem to be going the same way a bit.

Did USADA investigate Festina and other teams before making their pronouncement that USPS was the worst?

It doesn't take much investigating to reveal that Festina didn't win seven Tours de France.

d.

 

[Red Light]

What I don't want to see is some schmalzy US public apology along the lines of Tigger Woods, with the waterworks in full flow.

I did find Tygart's statement schmalzy in a way only the American's can do.

 

[smutchin]

Hope you can all forgive a naive question who came to this sport rather late.
There's lots of mention in the Reasoned Decision of Kevin Livingston. I've not heard of him before. What happened to him? He doesnt seem to be amongst those who have fessed up.

IIRC he now owns a bike shop in Aspen. Based in premises owned by one Mr L.Armstrong. I think this is mentioned in Tyler Hamilton's book.

http://www.kevinlivingston.com

d.

 

[Red Light]

That's professional sport for you. It's one of the reasons I've mostly lost interest in football. Unfortunately, cycling does seem to be going the same way a bit.



It doesn't take much investigating to reveal that Festina didn't win seven Tours de France.

d.

Ah but they might have done if they hadn't got caught. And what about Ulrich's teams? Did he dope alone or was there organised doping in his teams. He is after all the winner of one and presumed winner of 5 TdeF's now

 

[ufkacbln]

Apologies if you have made this plain before and it is lost. What is your opinion here. Did he or didn't he?

Simply - he did, however it is not that simple...

I think this is a mess.

Armstrong is undoubtedly guilty, but USADA has compromised itself on several occasions in the process, and this has always given the opportunity to challenge or disallow evidence. I have said from the start that the worst case scenario was to have valid evidence disallowed due to technicalities. RedLight’s unwelcome point above is a classic example,- the USADA is in breach of WADA codes, and the UCI refuses to beak the rules in the same way. Are they wrong to act legally?


There is also (again unpopular) fact that some of the tests etc are still not unequivocal, with the USADA themselves questioning the validity of B sample testing due to chemical changes and degradation.

Neither the UCI, nor USADA come out of this unscathed or with intact reputations, there is also going to be infighting between the two and that leads to a dilemma……

What is needed is to move away from the emphasis on “Get Lance” and look the evidence that doping in this period was rife, systematic and virtually universal.

By all means deal with Armstrong as an individual, but don’t let this cloud the depth and extent of the problem.

What I would like to see is an independent investigation into doping across professional cycling at this time, and then use those lessons to ensure that the same mistakes are not repeated, and improve the current situation

The end result could at least com up with some sort of constructive and positive outcome.

 

[dodgy]

My point is its never a level playing field - money buys advantage whether its by funding better training, better team mates, better equipment, better coaches...... or better doctors. Someone who can afford to train at high altitude and sleep in a hypobaric room will have an advantage, for similar reasons to having blood transfusions or EPO, over those who cannot afford to. One is exogenous manipulation of the blood and the other endogenous. One is legal, one isn't. Both are made possible by access to money.

And how does the organisation of doping that went on in USPS compare with the organised doping that went on in Festina (other than the obvious one that Festina's courier got caught). Do we know which one is worse? Did USADA investigate Festina and other teams before making their pronouncement that USPS was the worst?

Of course athletes will always try to gain the competitive edge, whether from training harder, using and developing new technology, but NOT by cheating with potentially harmful PEDs.

I can't believe I had to respond to you with that.

 

[ufkacbln]

if you don't like the comments, or their tone, report them, otherwise why add fuel to the embers?

Nott a mater of liking, or disliking, simply questioning why there seems to be a desire to bringthe thread to a close?

 

[smutchin]

If you're comparing USPS with Telekom, I reckon Riis is the one that's most like Armstrong. Ullrich is more like Tyler Hamilton. Personally, I strongly suspect Riis is just as bad as Armstrong, only less of a bully and less successful (in terms of results).

d.

 

[smutchin]

RedLight’s unwelcome point above is a classic example,- the USADA is in breach of WADA codes

It's unwelcome because it's untrue. Just repeating it ad nauseam won't ever make it true.

d.

 

[Red Light]

Of course athletes will always try to gain the competitive edge, whether from training harder, using and developing new technology, but NOT by cheating with potentially harmful PEDs.

I can't believe I had to respond to you with that.

Where do you draw the line between sleeping in a hypobaric chamber to elevate your red blood cell count and having an autologous blood transfusion (which is very low risk and not a PED)? Which is cheating and why?

 

[dodgy]

Where do you draw the line between sleeping in a hypobaric chamber to elevate your red blood cell count and having an autologous blood transfusion (which is very low risk and not a PED)? Which is cheating and why?

If I have to explain to you why pumping your body with damaging drugs (that HAVE killed people), self administering blood transfusions, untested wonder drugs, is dangerous, more dangerous that sleeping in a hypobaric chamber, then there's no point discussing.

 

[festival]

Well, seems to me the dam has burst its banks at last and the evidence is flowing fast.
So far, I see Nike have commented that its business as usual, although that could be them completing any obligations then withdrawing quietly?
Seen nothing from Trek or Oakley? All these big companies will be desperate to avoid bad publicity but business is business.
Is it too much to expect them to disassociate themselves with the cheat?
And I am waiting with baited breath to hear what the "fountain of all cycle race knowledge" Mr Liggett has to say on the latest news?

 

[raindog]

For the people who, even now, keep trotting out the "even playing field" crap, there's this from David Walsh this morning...
"....they (the UCI) should be apologizing to Paul Kimmage and to all the riders who were completely screwed by a doping culture. Riders who didn’t want to dope, who got out the sport, some who even stayed in and got absolutely hammered on the roads because they were at such a disadvantage because they wouldn’t dope"

and I think this, about Emma O'Reilly and Betsy Andreu is worth quoting......
"...For me they’re the two strongest people in all of this. They’ve been fantastic throughout all of this. They’ve been strong, always standing up for what was right, and standing up for what was right when it hurt them financially, when it hurt them with stress and people persecuting them. If anyone comes out of this as a hero it’s Emma and Betsy"

 

[yello]

What is needed is to move away from the emphasis on “Get Lance” and look the evidence that doping in this period was rife, systematic and virtually universal.

It's not an either/or. One can acknowledge the latter by addressing the role of the former.

I don't think anyone would conclude after reading the USADA report that Armstrong was just a doper. Arguably he contributed significantly to the rife and systematic nature of doping in that era.