Bike Forums - My (slightly tearful) reaction to the Armstrong news

Bike Forums (https://www.bikeforums.net/forum.php)

- Professional Cycling For the Fans (https://www.bikeforums.net/professional-cycling-fans/)

- - My (slightly tearful) reaction to the Armstrong news (https://www.bikeforums.net/professional-cycling-fans/605867-my-slightly-tearful-reaction-armstrong-news.html)

Quote:

Originally Posted by gsteinb (Post 14835512)

the point of all this is it's impossible to tell who doped because the tests were easy to evade.

How about confessed to doping?

Quote:

Originally Posted by gsteinb (Post 14835557)

have a party

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doping_...Tour_de_France

Whoah! Somebody already went to town on that list.

"Last Updated 12 October 2012"

Thanks for the link :thumb:

Quote:

Originally Posted by bgilchrist (Post 14833867)

Going forward? What if they have retired?

Why is USADA suggesting that Armstrong be stripped of all titles if they aren't prepared to do the same to those that pointed fingers and admitted?

The USADA entered into a devil's bargain. Eventually it will come back to bite them in the a r s e.

Quote:

Originally Posted by currand (Post 14833955)

In reading the affidavits, its pretty obvious that EVERYONE on the team was at the very least complicit in covering up the doping practices. Not to mention most of them on some occasion helped each other evade doping controls. Many even went so far as to provide others with banned substances. They shared their stock of EPO and Hgh, etc. If this were cocaine, they'd all be accused of trafficking and conspiracy.

This is all shades of grey. When you have Danielson recounting how he was saddened that he couldn't be on the same doping schedule as the "A" team in time to do well, you can't say that he (and others) were simply pawns in Armstrong/Brunyeel's master plan. These guys, frankly wanted to dope in the same way they wanted the same salary and perks as other riders.

Also, $10 says the team leader and DS in every other team at that time were requiring the same of their teams. Do you think Ulrich didn't push his domestiques to dope so they'd be there at the end? or Riis said "no" when asked by a rider for transfusions? Highly unlikely...

Exactly. Which is a violation of Article 2.8 of the World Anti-Doping Code:

Quote:

Administration or Attempted administration to any
Athlete In-Competition of any Prohibited Method or
Prohibited Substance, or administration or Attempted
administration to any Athlete Out-of-Competition of
any Prohibited Method or any Prohibited Substance
that is prohibited Out-of-Competition, or assisting,
encouraging, aiding, abetting, covering up or any
other type of complicity involving an anti-doping rule
violation or any Attempted anti-doping rule violation

Yet the prescribed ban for an Article 2.8 violation is four years per Article 10.3:

Quote:

For violations of Articles 2.7 (Trafficking or
Attempted Trafficking) or 2.8 (Administration
or Attempted Administration of Prohibited
Substance or Prohibited Method), the period
of Ineligibility imposed shall be a minimum of
four (4) years up to lifetime Ineligibility unless
the conditions provided in Article 10.5 are
met.

So, what does Article 10.5 say? Lots of stuff about reduced penalties for inadvertent use, cooperating with investigations, and admitting to violations, all of which can reduce a sentence

But Article 10.5.5 ends thus:

Quote:

If the
Athlete or other Person establishes
entitlement to a reduction or suspension of
the period of Ineligibility under two or more
of Articles 10.5.2, 10.5.3 or 10.5.4, then the
period of Ineligibility may be reduced or
suspended, but not below one-fourth of the
otherwise applicable period of Ineligibility.

Oh, wait. Only 3/4 of a sentence can be reduced.

So, the minimum sentence any of the witnesses should have been eligible for is one year, not six months.

What? Is the USADA making this up as they go along?

Lance, doping and the admissions- Tilford tells it like it is

This is great- I agree totally and thank Tilford for putting it up
http://stevetilford.com/?p=22105

Quote:

Originally Posted by JohnnyCyclist (Post 14833601)

Prior to USADA's report, I was saying "USADA sucks". I've done a 180 since.

The fallout will be far reaching ... and it's just begun.

really? The report made you do a 180 degree turn? You need to get out more.

I bet the correlation between former Lance fanboy to current snitch-haters are pretty strong.

Quote:

Originally Posted by guadzilla (Post 14834375)

I should clarify, I am quite happy with my CTS videos, actually (I like them better than the Spinervals and CTS customer service was been really exceptional in handling a problem I had that was of my own making) and I personally dont really feel de-frauded.

I am merely curious as to where that's going to go, as it seems to have escaped notice for the most part.

If I were a bigger ****** than I am, I'd email them and ask them what's up with this whole thing but as I am a fairly satisfied customer, I'll refrain. :)

If you are happy with the product and service then you are probably answering your own question. I'd imagine the connection to LA will be de-emphasized so Carmichael will have to stand on his own merits as a trainer. Having no experience with CTS I can't offer an opinion otherwise.

We don't need a new thread for everything anyone says about LA. Take it to one of the other threads. Massive merge coming.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Commodus (Post 14832930)

They don't need to know what I think. They did their job with honour and integrity, and that's all anyone can expect from anyone.

Absolutely.

Around these forums the idea of the USADA as jackbooted thugs employed by Hilary Clinton for knocking down tall trees in the sports world is pervasive. Not so. The USADA was created by the government in response to the demand from sports sanctioning bodies to stem the rising use of performance enhancing drugs by their star athletes. Just doing our jobs, ma'am.

Quote:

Originally Posted by bike56 (Post 14832889)

webmaster@USADA.org
719 785 2000 main number

I'll bet you ride a cute little US Postal kit with that Huffy of yours don't you? I mean Trek...

Possible Jail time for Lance?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/cycling/19921705

Marion Jones got 6 months for perjury, her transgressions seem minor in comparison.

add it to an existing thread.

Why isn't anyone questioning other sports too? I am worried that this doping stuff might be happening in other sports too.

I'm not sure if you'd look toward the top of the page

BikeForums

Quote:

Originally Posted by baccilus (Post 14836852)

Why isn't anyone questioning other sports too? I am worried that this doping stuff might be happening in other sports too.

Where have you been for the last 10 years? Use of steroids and other performance enhancing drugs is occurring in all professional sports, and has been ever since drugs and sports existed. The specifics of which drugs are involved depend on the sport and the objective, ie. strength, endurance, blood oxygen carrying capacity, etc.

You can rest assured that Congress would not have created the USADA just to clean up cycling.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shimagnolo (Post 14835128)

The video below the article is priceless: http://keepingscore.blogs.time.com/2...nce-armstrong/

;)

+1!

Quote:

Originally Posted by baccilus (Post 14836852)

Why isn't anyone questioning other sports too? I am worried that this doping stuff might be happening in other sports too.

This is a bike forum, so naturally we are bike focused. Track & Field is probably 90% doped too. I don't follow it, so not sure how hard they are trying to catch people. There are a lot of unnaturally muscled lookng sprinters at the top level. And I bet the distance runners know all the same tricks as cyclists. They probably are on the same doping forums and share "doctors"

Am I the only one that finds it ironic that the USA which has the highest percentage of (legal) drug use in the world gets so worked up and emotional when athletes indulge in "better living through chemistry". Granted there's a bit of apples and oranges, and I'm not equating the use of illegal performance enhancing drugs with the legal use of pharmaceuticals, but there is a parallel.

A staggering percentage of our children are on (prescribed) mood altering drugs. Likewise, many of the rest of the population use things like 5-hour energy, or all manner of drugs to stay awake, feel better, or do better at their jobs.

Every sport is full of doctors who use drugs of all types to boost performance and the line between legal and illegal can be very fine. We also shouldn't forget that it's the USA who introduced things like blood doping to competitive cycling in the first place. And don't bring up the issue of cheating, or we'll be here all day.

Not saying LA and other pros who used drugs are good guys, but maybe those of in glass houses should be careful with our stones.

If I ever saw Armstrong at a Oncology meeting, which is possible but not probable, I would make a point of telling him what I thought of him. I do not want him to feel comfortable surrounded by sycophants - either the sporting or the scientific kind.

It really would be a 'hate the game, not the player' situation... if he hadn't been engaged in a cover-up and tried to silence everyone who spoke up. If he had come out five years ago and said "yeah, I doped, but you have to realize that everyone in contention in the peleton is doping." After perjuring himself and trying to cover it up and strongarm others into silence there would be a very different reaction from most people.

My thoughts on the Lance Armstrong saga

I know a lot of people really hate the guy. I don't blame you if that's what you want to do. Here are a couple of thoughts. If you consider that, apparently everyone was doping at the time. Perhaps it might be fair to still consider him the best rider during that era?

What really kills me is this. If the UCI takes away his TDF wins and then passes them down to the guys who came in second as the winner for that year, in every case, they will be giving the title to someone who has already been convicted of/confessed to doping.

So, it makes no sense to give a convicted doper a title they take away from another doper!!!

I'm not saying some form of punishment isn't warranted. I think some how that should be the case. I would however feel bad for the "new winner". A phone call telling them "congratulations, your now the new winner". No media blitz. No financial rewards. No feeling of "being the best in the world". What a bunch of crap for everyone involved.

No doubt there is no easy answer to how to repair the damage.

enough places to post about this already