The plot thickens

[Chuffy]

+1 - getting tiresome

I'm a fanboy and I hate football. I am even watching the Tour of Poland just now I enjoy cycling so much

Innocent until proven Innocent is how I see this one ending.

I'm just wondering Kenny - what would be sufficient to convince you that Lance was a doper and how will you feel if it was established to your satisfaction that he was? It's a straight question, I'm not setting you up for anything.

 

[wafflycat]

This strikes me as a note of desperation creeping in..

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/armstrong-laywer-condemns-un-american-investigation

"Lance Armstrong’s lawyer Brian D. Daly has condemned the federal investigation of his client and his former US Postal Service team as “un-American and a waste of taxpayers’ money"."

*un-American* FFS!

 

[Chuffy]

Heh, it certainly looks as if the defence team is in full damage limitation mode.

I was somewhat sceptical of the investigation, I thought that it would come down to the word of Rider X against Team Tex and that riders would probably stick to their tried and tested 'I saw nothing and I've never failed a drug test' line. If the riders were prepared to stonewall then the enquiry team would have nothing to go on. However, it looks as if riders might be frightened of the consequences of lying to the enquiry, seeing as Novitsky seems to have actual send-you-to-jail teeth. It will be interesting to see how many other riders will be prepared to sing, in exchange for anonymity and immunity from prosecution.

 

[Hont]

I am even watching the Tour of Poland just now I enjoy cycling so much

Innocent until proven Innocent is how I see this one ending.

Can't believe anyone who follows cycling thinks this. It's following cycling that has taught me to question every outstanding physical performance in sport (not just cycling but athletics, tennis, football, rugby etc.).

There's nothing wrong with wanting to believe that someone is clean, but believing it despite all of the indicators to the contrary is denial.

 

[kennykool]

I'm just wondering Kenny - what would be sufficient to convince you that Lance was a doper and how will you feel if it was established to your satisfaction that he was? It's a straight question, I'm not setting you up for anything.

Honestly Chuffy (and laugh if you like) I have actually been asking myself that very question for sometime now as there is more and more "Evidence" pointing towards the fact that he could possibly might have been in some teeny weeny way been involved in such atrocities.....Did I just say that??????

I suppose its the story of the smoking gun....ie. if I were to see video footage of LA actually doing/talking about doing something wrong THEN and ONLY then would I believe it! You can force as much scientific data down my throat but I would need to see/hear it with my own eyes/ears.

He is such a hero of mine that it would take a lot for me to believe what is being said.

In fairness tho - and i say this in all seriousness - even if he was found to be "dirty" i would not change my attitude towards him. Along the same lines Tiger is still my golfing hero - even more so now cos he is a mad shagger ha ha

 

[GrumpyGregry]

No lynchmob Greg surely

....

We'd still be looking for cheats, but a detailed knowledge of the USPS and all Bruyneel-related teams' doping regime (allegedly) would be useful for the future of anti-doping campaign strategies.

A well reasoned post. More than small part of me wants either a) dopers in all the sports (chiefly cycling and rugby union/league) I follow exposed and banned for life or b) the authorities to get real and allow it because they cannot police it effectively. I'm ambivalent about the outcome.

I harbour huge suspicions about everyone involved in the 99-07 era and flippin' strong ones about the people involved today. Even those from close to home. When I find myself thinking "How does he do that?" these days, when someone comes back from the dead better than Lazarus, I think I'm entitled to be suspicious. I don't think working out how someone top level cheated 10 years ago will help you catch top level cheats today. The doping technology accessed by the top flight will have moved on and only the water carriers will be using dated techniques.

As an, albeit jaded and cynical, LA fanboy I welcome the FBI investigation and hope it comes to trial as soon as possible. When it goes to court, as it looks like it must, then anonymous sources will have to sit on the witness stand and a jury will sift the evidence and then a verdict will be reached. Some will be happy with the outcome and some are destined to be frustrated. Both parties can't be right. Will it be another case of OJ?

 

[Tim Bennet.]

Mad shagging is not against the rules of golf. It would be hard to establish a case that Tiger's golf had improved post, or even prior to shagging.

However, doping is against the rules of cycling and if proved guilty would nullify all of Lance's cycling achievements and make the huge personal fortune he has generated from his wins (and resulting sponsorship), to be a fraud on a monumental scale.

The only parallels between Lance and Tiger would be in their position as questionable role models, but that is a moral and personal considering for them, their fans and sponsors. But by cheating at the very thing that has been the bedrock of everything he has have done and espoused over the last dozen years would be more damming of Lance than even Tiger's harshest critics doled out. He would be vilified and even be at some personal risk from those who would feel utterly, utterly ripped off by his monumental hypocrisy.

I have gone from being a staunch supporter who was convinced he was clean, to an admirer who hoped he was clean, to someone who now fears he probably was no better than the others. There maybe no smoking gun, but the odds of him having been clean at a time when he was so much better than all his doped up contemporaries, seem to get shorter by the day.

 

[Chuffy]

Honestly Chuffy (and laugh if you like) I have actually been asking myself that very question for sometime now as there is more and more "Evidence" pointing towards the fact that he could possibly might have been in some teeny weeny way been involved in such atrocities.....Did I just say that??????

Fair enough and thanks for answering. I think you're going to find that it's more than 'a teeny weeny way' though and I'm interested to know how you will deal with that.

I suppose its the story of the smoking gun....ie. if I were to see video footage of LA actually doing/talking about doing something wrong THEN and ONLY then would I believe it! You can force as much scientific data down my throat but I would need to see/hear it with my own eyes/ears.

That's a bit blinkered and naive, if you don't mind me saying so. If you have systematic doping within a team, especially a team that revolved exclusively around Lance (and Johann, let's not forget that slippery crook) and his single goal of winning the Tour then how can the team leader not be aware of what is going on? That's in addition to the other evidence that has come out over the years. Saying that you will only accept it if Lance himself is prepared to corroborate is a lazy way of dismissing things out of hand.

He is such a hero of mine that it would take a lot for me to believe what is being said.

Yup, but there must surely come a point where you have to take the cotton wool out of your ears, remove the blinkers and accept that the image and reality are very, very different. You won't be alone, there will be plenty of others who won't accept anything that contradicts their view of Hero Lance.

In fairness tho - and i say this in all seriousness - even if he was found to be "dirty" i would not change my attitude towards him. Along the same lines Tiger is still my golfing hero - even more so now cos he is a mad shagger ha ha

Hmmm. So being a disgraced cheat wouldn't matter? To be honest, I dislike him as a person, the cheating is secondary and as we all know, pretty much the whole top ten of that era were very, very naughty boys indeed. What does stick in the throat though is the repeated lies and bullshit that he has used to defend himself with. Also the bullying of anyone who dares to speak up (Bassons, Simeoni etc).

Tiger isn't much of a comparison, he might be a loose trousered knicker dropper but that has nothing to do with his sport.

 

[GrumpyGregry]

So, was Indurain a doper? Started as a no hoper, miraculous transformation to GC contender, dominated for years. Sounds like someone else.

If not, how do you build a team around someone so outstanding, capable of sticking with him, to get him onto the podium?

And if you are on a team where people in the teem cheat does that make you a cheat too in what is essentially an individual competition where the teams are subordinate?

 

[zimzum42]

Indurain was blatantly juiced to some extent, but he was still a physical freak and a legendary rider.

Mercx was juiced, doesn't stop him being a great rider...


They are all juiced in some way or other, even all the legal supplements and stuff are crazy, compared to you and I with a bowl of pasta and a coffee...

 

[Crackle]

My money on the last clean winner would be Lemond and before him Roche and Delgado were a bit iffy.

 

[Chuffy]

My money on the last clean winner would be Lemond and before him Roche and Delgado were a bit iffy.

Delgado was more than just iffy! Lemond sticks out like a sore thumb but I'd put a very small amount of money on Bertie being clean this year. Of course I could be wrong...

 

[Rohloff_Brompton_Rider]

sorry to butt in guys, i'm confused, isn't LA the most tested sportsman the world has ever seen? didn't all his tests prove him negative?

i must admit i have not followed it too closely, but as it is getting interesting, i'm starting to read archived news.

it does smack of the michel jackson child molester witch hunt which ended in nothing.

surely they will still have blood samples from the years in question, can they not just test them with todays technology?

 

[Tim Bennet.]

isn't LA the most tested sportsman the world has ever seen?

This was often spouted by LA, but was apparently completely unsubstantiated.

surely they will still have blood samples from the years in question, can they not just test them with todays technology?

They have; he failed. But it can't be used as 'evidence'.

 

[Chuffy]

They have; he failed. But it can't be used as 'evidence'.

To be strictly accurate it was his urine samples from the 1999 Tour that were re-tested in 2005. They tested positive for EPO but there was no ‘B’ sample to confirm the results.