The new improved Lance Armstrong discussion thread.*

Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.

Flying_Monkey

Recyclist
Location
Odawa
Spot on, rich p. It has nothing to do with any jurisdiction's standards of proof in the criminal courts. That's just a red light herring. As the USADA reasoned decision document points out, the nearest equivalent is the standard of proof required for professional misconduct charges, and the evidence in the report leaps over that line.
 

marinyork

Resting in suspended Animation
Location
Logopolis
I've been surprised how much publicity this has got on the beeb. The BBC are now writing more complex web pages to explain all this to the general public much to my surprise. Sky News interviewed Wiggins about it and he looked fairly p*ssed off being there talking about Lance Armstrong and about the actual content of the files.
 
He was a hero to a great many, me included (up to the first blood passport season of 2008 when watching everyone crawl up mountains switched on a light bulb in my head). You've seen the light now, be proud that this quote no longer applies to you...

"If anyone still believes he was not doping, then they believe in Santa Claus." Professor Jordan Kobritz quoted in the Guardian

You might want to change your sig though...

"What would Lance do?" Dope, lie, cheat, bully and threaten everyone in his way.
We were all fooled for some of the time. The initial suspicions voiced by the French media were viewed as sour grapes when he won the '99 Tour, with jokes going round about how they had found traces of unusual substances like soap and toothpaste in his samples. As time went on however and more and more started to come out opinion gradually changed. We all started off wanting to believe, we gave up as it became increasingly unbelievable.
 

yello

Guest
I've been surprised how much publicity this has got on the beeb.

Me too. I new this would be big (The Fall of the House of Armstrong was never going to be quiet) but I wasn't expecting it to generate the coverage it is doing... not quite yet anyway. I think it probably speaks to the popularity of cancer Armstrong rather than cycling Armstrong.
 
2094697 said:
But if there were proof to a criminal standard sufficient to stick Armstrong inside for a while that would stand as a rather good lesson to others for the future.
Well, there's a good chance of a perjury charge sticking.
 

Hont

Guru
Location
Bromsgrove
 

smutchin

Cat 6 Racer
Location
The Red Enclave
Pro cycling’s big lie began losing its impetus when organized doping within the Festina team was exposed at the 1998 Tour. The revelations of the 2006 Operación Puerto blood-doping ring (of which Hamilton was a part) triggered the multiple admissions of EPO use by members (including Holm) of the Deutsche Telekom team of Bjarne Riis and Jan Ullrich. Those confessions accelerated the process, but neither the Festina affair, the Puerto scandal or the Telekom mess were fully investigated by the French, Spanish or German cycling federations, nor the UCI.

http://www.pelotonmagazine.com/Wilcockson/content/21/1902/Different-Takes-on-the-USADA-Decision
 

rich p

ridiculous old lush
Location
Brighton
I'm finding this, "I knew these guys and I am truly shocked" reaction we keep hearing, even from Brialsford who was with David Millar when he was busted slightly hard to take. Yates too but also some journos, riders and DSs.
For crying out loud, we who have followed the sport, have known for years through the incredible times and speeds, the series of busts and the drip feed of circumstantial evidence. Where have these people been for the last decade?

I do like this Goebbel's quote even if it doesn't cast us in a good light but it's Armstrong to a tee...

“One should not as a rule reveal one’s secrets…. The English follow the principle that when one lies, one should lie big, and stick to it. They keep up their lies, even at the risk of looking ridiculous.”
 
U

User169

Guest
Yeah but that says to me - ok guys you can go out there and dope as a team, but if all of you "grass up" the main man then you'll get a lesser ban and the main man gets shafted

They are all guilty - and have admitted it!

I thought USADA had said that they'd have been easier on Armstrong if he'd been cooperative?

In any event, it's standard tactics for acting against cartels, both in the US and Europe.
 

Hont

Guru
Location
Bromsgrove
I have now read the whole 202 pages of the USADA's reasoned decision and all of the English language avadavits in the appendix. :wacko:

Some of the things that struck me which have not been commented on (or at least I haven't seen any comment on)...

-USADA got no evidence from FBI investigation, despite requesting it. That's odd no? Political pressure being applied?
-Kevin Livingston refused to testify. Why would that be? Let's see who his current employer is....
-Chris Carmichael seems to get off pretty much scot-free.
-The long held suspicion that Lance asked Trek to sever their ties with Greg Lemond looks to be confirmed.
-Axel Merckx was said to be working with Ferrari by Frankie Andreu. I thought Eddy had been a bit reticent with his ridiculous Lance defence.
 
Top Bottom