The new improved Lance Armstrong discussion thread.*

[Flying_Monkey]

Anheuser-Busch (the 'beer' giant) deserts Armstrong too.

 

[rich p]

Yes but has USADA got jurisdiction?
Oh, and they missed out a semi-colon on page 73 of the document.

 

[Flying_Monkey]

I think there is a very high probability that he doped as did anyone at the top of the sport in those years

A weasly answer.

What we know, and we do know it now, is that he doped in multiple ways for years and years, and that not only this, he was involved in planning his doping on a scale that was unprecedented, and he colluded in persuading others to dope (or leave his team, or even the sport), he threatened, bribed, covered up, lied about his doping and that of his associates etc. etc. etc. He wasn't just engaged in something which was culturally normal, he was a major player in the creation and sustenance of that culture, making things worse than they had been before at a time when the fight against doping in sport was growing as an issue.

The courts have ruled against your arguments about jurisdiction and process. The appropriate body has made the decision which it has been shown it has the power to make, using the standards of proof which it always uses and to which Armstrong and all cyclists are signatory by virtue of their participation in the sport, and has published a full report on the evidence, which is damning. You haven't got a leg to stand on.

 

[MichaelM]

Interestingly I came across the following strongly worded protest from the Summer Olympic International Federations and IOC Athletes Commission to WADA about the violations by LNDD/WADA of the regulations and the rights of athletes in the retrospective 1999 sample tests and demanding the suspension of LNDD . So myself and MichaelM are not the only ones that think the rules were badly broken in that incident. Not that I expect it to cut much ice here.

Just to be clear, I don't think the rules were broken (by USADA /WADA - though not a doubt in my mind that Armstrong cheated). Even if rules were broken (by UASDA/WADA), I don't care.

Michaelm is pulling your plonker!!

I was indeed

 

[400bhp]

A weasly answer.

What we know, and we do know it now, is that he doped in multiple ways for years and years, and that not only this, he was involved in planning his doping on a scale that was unprecedented, and he colluded in persuading others to dope (or leave his team, or even the sport), he threatened, bribed, covered up, lied about his doping and that of his associates etc. etc. etc. He wasn't just engaged in something which was culturally normal, he was a major player in the creation and sustenance of that culture, making things worse than they had been before at a time when the fight against doping in sport was growing as an issue.

The courts have ruled against your arguments about jurisdiction and process. The appropriate body has made the decision which it has been shown it has the power to make, using the standards of proof which it always uses and to which Armstrong and all cyclists are signatory by virtue of their participation in the sport, and has published a full report on the evidence, which is damning. You haven't got a leg to stand on.

For a moment I replaced doping wth corporate manipulation and I thought I was reading an obituary of Robert Maxwell.

 

[smutchin]

Come in, Sean Yates, your time is up...

http://www.teamsky.com/article/0,27290,17553_8173493,00.html

 

[400bhp]

Come in, Sean Yates, your time is up...

http://www.teamsky.com/article/0,27290,17553_8173493,00.html

This is the only way IMO. Unrepentant (past and present tense) users have no place in the sport.

 

[tigger]

Come in, Sean Yates, your time is up...

http://www.teamsky.com/article/0,27290,17553_8173493,00.html

It has to be really doesn't it?

 

[Crackle]

Come in, Sean Yates, your time is up...

http://www.teamsky.com/article/0,27290,17553_8173493,00.html

The Guardian, William Fotheringham, was indicating there might be further statements from Sky tomorrow.

 

[Bollo]

Yes but has USADA got jurisdiction?
Oh, and they missed out a semi-colon on page 73 of the document.

I found a grocers' apostrophe in there as well.

This will be my only contribution to this thread.

 

[tigger]

Apologies if this has been posted before, but this truth amnesty put forward by our very own Peter Keen is the best next step in my view

http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2012/oct/13/peter-keen-lance-armstrong-truth-commission

 

[Archie]

Just found a very interesting store on the web of documents relating to LA. They include this one with David Walsh which is a proposal to take down LA as a very profitable (financially) exercise from a team doctor (who worked on the USPS team in 1996). Some quotes from the email trail:

From Prentice Steffen to David Walsh (Subject: Highly Confidential; Date: 11 June 2004)

The potential financial upside to this undertaking and whomever may​

join me in it is considerable:​

60,000,000 Total paid by USPS to LA, et al​

180,000,000 Potential fine (3 times fraud amount)​

54,000,000 30% is the average awarded to the whistleblower(s)​

32,400,000 Less the 40% the attorneys keep as their contingency fee​

​

I'll be interested to know what you think about this and whether you​

may agree to contact Emma about this. I recall that you mentioned​

she was interested in finding a way for her story to involve a pay​

day. Time is critical as only the first person(s) to file such a​

suit are eligible for the reward​

​

​

​

The reply from David Walsh to Prentice Steffen:

Prentice,​

If it can be worked, it's a brilliant idea. Emma is totally in favour, as​

her evidence is going to be in the public domain anyway.​

Will be touch,​

David​

Looking at the numbers alone this stinks like a month old kipper. Steffen knew in 2004 what USPS paid in sponsorship? According to this link the figure wasn't known until fairly recently and I doubt Steffen could even conceive it was near that amount at the time.

Then we're supposed to believe the USG will get 3X the money defrauded in fines? Then pay out 30% of this to the whisleblower? Nope, I'm calling BS, and I doubt Steffen or Walsh would swallow it at the time either. They're reasonably intelligent individuals, after all.

Puts David Walsh and Emma O'Reilly in a somewhat different light.

I don't think it puts anyone in a different light.

 

[StuAff]

Trek and Honey Stinger the latest companies to drop him....

 

[User169]

Trek and Honey Stinger the latest companies to drop him....

doesn't he own or part-own honey stinger? He's now dropping himself?

 

[StuAff]

doesn't he own or part-own honey stinger? He's now dropping himself?

Yup, he's a shareholder, but they're dropping him anyway!