The new improved Lance Armstrong discussion thread.*

[400bhp]

Adrian - I don't know the intricacies of pro-cycling but it would seem plausible to me.

 

[GrumpyGregry]

Is your aim that bad, then?

In the words of Elvis Costello; my aim is true.

 

[GrumpyGregry]

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

apparently he's a shareholder in Trek. And SRAM

and in the same way as he has stood down as chair of Livestrong but remains on its board and will be compensated, in effect, as its number one employee when he speaks in public for them, then losing his sponsorship has no effect on his ownership, or other governance/employee status' with any these organisations. The shareholder/owner within him has relaised it is time to wind his neck and and lower his profile tis all.

In other words; all this 'dropping him' is just the worst kind of PR driven spintastic bullshit.

 

[Fab Foodie]

Clicked there, still can't read Dutch

Yeah, I even double clicked and all I got was double Dutch ....

 

[smutchin]

I clicked, but it's all Greek to me.

 

[philipbh]

Verbruggen has apparently been quoted in De Telegraaf as saying there's no evidence against Lance.

Un-f***ing-believable.

d.

its all been shredded / flushed / buried under a tree somewhere

 

[kedab]

It certainly is a fascinating story and I'm sure there'll be a film about it one day.

However, I suspect that this may end tragically quite soon.

He deserves no sympathy at all from anyone, but I hope he is able to find peace within himself and live a quiet, nondescript life somewhere.

i wholeheartedly agree.

 

[mangaman]

2012:-
Team Sky & Olympics - 2 steps forward
Lance Armstrong - 3 steps back.

True - cycling post-Brad and Olympics was all the rage for about 2 months in this country for the 1st time I can remember.

People were aware of doping - just as they are in athletics and just about every sport - but the British cared little about Contador, for example, as they had never heard of him.

The only cyclists most Britains could name would be Brad, Vicky P, Chris Hoy and Armstrong.

 

[400bhp]

Are you trying to be clever?

 

[User169]

If you can read Dutch, click here:
http://www.telegraaf.nl/telesport/wielersport/13089646/__Geen_bewijs_tegen_Armstrong__.html

He says Armstrong hasn't failed any doping tests, so there's no case to answer. That's about it really.

 

[StuAff]

The shareholding in Trek is only a fraction of a percent, I can't imagine SRAM were any more generous.

 

[User169]

He says Armstrong hasn't failed any doping tests, so there's no case to answer. That's about it really.

Now he's saying that he's been misquoted by De Telegraaf. Apparently, his comments were in reply to Greg Lemond's wife's suggestions that he got a payment from Nike to coverup a failed drug test. He says that Armstrong didn't ever fail a test, so the Lemond story is false.

 

[Chrisc]

Should he be talking to anybody prior to the UCI actually getting their finger out and responding to this document? Dozy...

 

[rich p]

Now he's saying that he's been misquoted by De Telegraaf. Apparently, his comments were in reply to Greg Lemond's wife's suggestions that he got a payment from Nike to coverup a failed drug test. He says that Armstrong didn't ever fail a test, so the Lemond story is false.

Well, apart from the inadmissable EPO tests, the allegedly covered up tour de suisse test and the backdated TUE and the irregular blood tests in 2009(?), he's absolutely right.

 

[jdtate101]

He says that Armstrong didn't ever fail a test, so the Lemond story is false.

I expect what he means is LA never 'publicly' failed a test, and as we now know these two poles are MILES apart. Without a public fail (ie supporting evidence which is undisputed by all agencies and individuals involved) there is no smoking gun. LA is dirty, no doubt, but unfortunately the only one who REALLY knows the truth is LA, and lets face it hell will freeze over before he confesses.