Restoration of Armstrong's Tour de France Titles?
#51
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Virginia
Posts: 888
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 71 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
That's pre EPO era but if they really wanted to dig, I suppose they could go back to the early '90s and really go through the era. Somehow I don't think they'll bother.
Back in the days of the Red Zinger Classic in Colorado in the late '70s promoter Mo Siegel never sent samples to the lab because it was too expensive. They just gathered the samples from podium winners and randoms and threw them away, lol.
Too bad Phil Anderson was distracted by an invitation from a young lady to join her at her place after winning the Vail criterium stage in '78 and missed doping control. He was the only one who was ever suspended. They didn't actually start sending samples to the lab until the then-Coors Classic in '83.
Back in the days of the Red Zinger Classic in Colorado in the late '70s promoter Mo Siegel never sent samples to the lab because it was too expensive. They just gathered the samples from podium winners and randoms and threw them away, lol.
Too bad Phil Anderson was distracted by an invitation from a young lady to join her at her place after winning the Vail criterium stage in '78 and missed doping control. He was the only one who was ever suspended. They didn't actually start sending samples to the lab until the then-Coors Classic in '83.
#52
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: insane diego, california
Posts: 8,287
Bikes: 85 pinarello treviso steel, 88 nishiki olympic steel. 95 look kg 131 carbon, 11 trek madone 5.2 carbon
Mentioned: 26 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1619 Post(s)
Liked 3,087 Times
in
1,670 Posts
time to move on. good luck figuring out who or whom was "clean" or less doped than the others. seems to permeate all competitive/well-compensated sports and has for
quite some time now. have operated under the assumption that everyone is doing something questionable or worse and have rarely been disappointed. do i like convicted
or supposed dopers? yep. do i like holier than thou and supposed clean riders? yep. just like the sport. i have zero problems with a lifetime ban for first time offenders
or at least something stricter (4-10 years) but the powers that be better have a damn airtight testing program than they do now.
quite some time now. have operated under the assumption that everyone is doing something questionable or worse and have rarely been disappointed. do i like convicted
or supposed dopers? yep. do i like holier than thou and supposed clean riders? yep. just like the sport. i have zero problems with a lifetime ban for first time offenders
or at least something stricter (4-10 years) but the powers that be better have a damn airtight testing program than they do now.
#53
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: insane diego, california
Posts: 8,287
Bikes: 85 pinarello treviso steel, 88 nishiki olympic steel. 95 look kg 131 carbon, 11 trek madone 5.2 carbon
Mentioned: 26 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1619 Post(s)
Liked 3,087 Times
in
1,670 Posts
fortunately, i think the hysteria to get retroactive will die with the armstrong/ullrich/pantani/zulle/virenque era. can you imagine another sport coming
across old samples and applying modern applications to samples from platini, gretzky, ripken, sampras or elway?
across old samples and applying modern applications to samples from platini, gretzky, ripken, sampras or elway?
Last edited by diphthong; 08-05-13 at 12:58 PM.
#54
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 5,866
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times
in
2 Posts
Why?
Because they take doping controls seriously. The one instance I am thinking of was for a player who had Asthma (I think). Because of that he was allowed to take a drug that normally was banned because it can server as a masking agent. He had been doing that for at least a couple of years.
Then one year he neglected to check a box in his annual paperwork. He got a 2 month suspension for using the drug he had legally used for years. He appealed. The suspension stood, only good thing was that the write up of that made it clear that this was purely a paperwork error on his part, not cheating and he got no additional consequences (e.g. no strike against him going forward).
Rather different from Cycling and post dated doctors notes.
#55
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: location location
Posts: 3,033
Bikes: MBK Super Mirage 1991, CAAD10, Yuba Mundo Lux, and a Cannondale Criterium Single Speed
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 343 Post(s)
Liked 292 Times
in
205 Posts
That's exactly why they've introduced the 8 year limit on re-testing. But if you don't test back a few years, you're giving a free pass to everyone to use whatever they can't detect today.
#56
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Because of Internet lack of security only give USA, here; want more simply ask, through messaging.
Posts: 98
Bikes: I think I just found out (happy to finally be able to find out) that my bicycle is Raleigh's '2007 Venture 3.0 SR NEX-4000!
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
What do you mean?
If that is what he said in that interview, then I am with you.
I would not put it past a athlete, that has achieved the highest possible achievement(s) in his sports (and used illegal drugs that are PEDs to do it that risks jail time and hurts one's body) to put that before everything else.
I believe this covers it:
Oprah: Did you ever take banned substances to enhance your cycling performance?
Lance Armstrong: Yes
Oprah: Was one of those banned substances EPO?
Lance Armstrong: Yes
Oprah: Did you ever blood dope, or use blood transfusions to enhance your cycling performance?
Lance Armstrong: Yes
Oprah: Did you ever used other banned substances like cortisones, testosterone, or human growth hormone?
Lance Armstrong: Yes
Oprah: In all seven of your Tour de France victories, did you ever take banned substances or blood dope?
Lance Armstrong: Yes
Considering the DOJ is on Lance for about what his net worth is, the restoration of his Tour titles have to be pretty low on his list of priorities at this point.
Oprah: Did you ever take banned substances to enhance your cycling performance?
Lance Armstrong: Yes
Oprah: Was one of those banned substances EPO?
Lance Armstrong: Yes
Oprah: Did you ever blood dope, or use blood transfusions to enhance your cycling performance?
Lance Armstrong: Yes
Oprah: Did you ever used other banned substances like cortisones, testosterone, or human growth hormone?
Lance Armstrong: Yes
Oprah: In all seven of your Tour de France victories, did you ever take banned substances or blood dope?
Lance Armstrong: Yes
Considering the DOJ is on Lance for about what his net worth is, the restoration of his Tour titles have to be pretty low on his list of priorities at this point.
I would not put it past a athlete, that has achieved the highest possible achievement(s) in his sports (and used illegal drugs that are PEDs to do it that risks jail time and hurts one's body) to put that before everything else.
#59
Banned
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: West Coast of Wisconsin
Posts: 665
Bikes: 2011 Surly LHT 2005 LeMond Zurich
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
I'm just going to go with the position that any standout on the elite level of any sport is cheating and be done with it. Those folks are so close in ability, and other then the occasional freakish human, there is nothing else to account for the differences except PEDs
#61
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Because of Internet lack of security only give USA, here; want more simply ask, through messaging.
Posts: 98
Bikes: I think I just found out (happy to finally be able to find out) that my bicycle is Raleigh's '2007 Venture 3.0 SR NEX-4000!
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
#62
Trek 500 Kid
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Spokane WA
Posts: 2,565
Bikes: '83 Trek 970 road --- '86 Trek 500 road
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2904 Post(s)
Liked 380 Times
in
305 Posts
Correct me if I'm wrong but the 8 year limit pertains to samples from the Olympics and USADA only. I don't know that it applies to pro cycling in general. It didn't stop USADA's case against Armstrong from going forward anyway.
Last edited by Zinger; 08-06-13 at 01:57 PM.
#63
Senior Member
Under special circumstance they are allowed to go back farther. In LA's case they looked at it as a continuous infraction that didn't end until 2010.
#65
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Bossier City, La
Posts: 628
Bikes: 70's Motobecane, 89 Centurion Ironman
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
#66
Banned
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: West Coast of Wisconsin
Posts: 665
Bikes: 2011 Surly LHT 2005 LeMond Zurich
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
#69
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Cape Cod, Massachusetts
Posts: 2,318
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time
in
1 Post
Have to say, in all honesty, that I am a little troubled at how they avoided the SOL. I can see stripping him of everything within it. I understand their reasoning. Not sure I can agree with it 100%.
He was offered a deal letting him keep 5 TdFs and his bronze medal from Sydney, if he admitted doping. He told them to stuff it, and within 6 months went on national TV and admitted it all. His thinking process there also eludes me.
He was offered a deal letting him keep 5 TdFs and his bronze medal from Sydney, if he admitted doping. He told them to stuff it, and within 6 months went on national TV and admitted it all. His thinking process there also eludes me.
#70
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 3,137
Bikes: RichardZEP
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 21 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time
in
1 Post
If you restore the titles to Armstrong, the cheaters will come back as the ultimate threat is gone; being banned is temporary, losing your title is forever.
#71
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Because of Internet lack of security only give USA, here; want more simply ask, through messaging.
Posts: 98
Bikes: I think I just found out (happy to finally be able to find out) that my bicycle is Raleigh's '2007 Venture 3.0 SR NEX-4000!
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
xfimpg,
WOW, what a statement you just inserted, that banning someone can only be temporary. How is that not just a long suspension?
I agree that titles (records and Etc.) are a huge important reason for athletes to do what they do; but I think being prevented from ever participating in their sport of their life (so far; for 99% of them) is bigger punishment. I just do not think any sports organization would ban someone and then years later treat it like/change it to a suspension.
I think they should do both, they have him suspended, now strip all the awards that he gained from being dirty.
WOW, what a statement you just inserted, that banning someone can only be temporary. How is that not just a long suspension?
I agree that titles (records and Etc.) are a huge important reason for athletes to do what they do; but I think being prevented from ever participating in their sport of their life (so far; for 99% of them) is bigger punishment. I just do not think any sports organization would ban someone and then years later treat it like/change it to a suspension.
I think they should do both, they have him suspended, now strip all the awards that he gained from being dirty.
Last edited by GreatWhiteShark; 08-16-13 at 10:46 AM. Reason: gain to gained
#72
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Cape Cod, Massachusetts
Posts: 2,318
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time
in
1 Post
xfimpg,
WOW, what a statement you just inserted, that banning someone can only be temporary. How is that not just a long suspension?
I agree that titles (records and Etc.) are a huge important reason for athletes to do what they do; but I think being prevented from ever participating in their sport of their life (so far; for 99% of them) is bigger punishment. I just do not think any sports organization would ban someone and then years later treat it like/change it to a suspension.
I think they should do both, they have him suspended, now strip all the awards that he gained from being dirty.
WOW, what a statement you just inserted, that banning someone can only be temporary. How is that not just a long suspension?
I agree that titles (records and Etc.) are a huge important reason for athletes to do what they do; but I think being prevented from ever participating in their sport of their life (so far; for 99% of them) is bigger punishment. I just do not think any sports organization would ban someone and then years later treat it like/change it to a suspension.
I think they should do both, they have him suspended, now strip all the awards that he gained from being dirty.
#73
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 3,137
Bikes: RichardZEP
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 21 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time
in
1 Post
xfimpg,
WOW, what a statement you just inserted, that banning someone can only be temporary. How is that not just a long suspension?
I agree that titles (records and Etc.) are a huge important reason for athletes to do what they do; but I think being prevented from ever participating in their sport of their life (so far; for 99% of them) is bigger punishment. I just do not think any sports organization would ban someone and then years later treat it like/change it to a suspension.
I think they should do both, they have him suspended, now strip all the awards that he gained from being dirty.
WOW, what a statement you just inserted, that banning someone can only be temporary. How is that not just a long suspension?
I agree that titles (records and Etc.) are a huge important reason for athletes to do what they do; but I think being prevented from ever participating in their sport of their life (so far; for 99% of them) is bigger punishment. I just do not think any sports organization would ban someone and then years later treat it like/change it to a suspension.
I think they should do both, they have him suspended, now strip all the awards that he gained from being dirty.
Now go back and re-read that 10 times before responding. And if you don't want to respond, I'm fine with that.
#74
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Because of Internet lack of security only give USA, here; want more simply ask, through messaging.
Posts: 98
Bikes: I think I just found out (happy to finally be able to find out) that my bicycle is Raleigh's '2007 Venture 3.0 SR NEX-4000!
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
You need to read and understand statements before responding to them. I said, and I quote:
Being banned under the current rules is temporary. Current titles removed are forever.
Now go back and re-read that 10 times before responding. And if you don't want to respond, I'm fine with that.
Being banned under the current rules is temporary. Current titles removed are forever.
Now go back and re-read that 10 times before responding. And if you don't want to respond, I'm fine with that.
#75
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Because of Internet lack of security only give USA, here; want more simply ask, through messaging.
Posts: 98
Bikes: I think I just found out (happy to finally be able to find out) that my bicycle is Raleigh's '2007 Venture 3.0 SR NEX-4000!
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
There isn't a sport anywhere that bans someone for life for the first doping offense, as far as I know. In the NFL, for example, it's a whopping 4 games. Zero tolerance sounds fine in theory, but it can lead to injustices in certain situations. There is such a thing as accidental ingestion. Athletes are still responsible for what they ingest, but the circumstances can differ. Certain banned substances---like albuterol---are legal to use under a certain daily dosage limit. Would you ban someone for life if they test at a miniscule level over that limit? In that case, you'd likely get disqualified from the event, but not even suspended.
*- I would agree only if it is under one-time to have failed one-race. Not caught one-time to have failed more three-races/tests. But then the way cyclist are tested so much and process is done I do not see how that could happen.
**- Plus, there are huge debates and findings out there about the accuracy of the tests.
Last edited by GreatWhiteShark; 08-16-13 at 11:44 AM. Reason: sign to side & adding I am for rehabilitation