Et Tu George?
 

PCAD is doping of a different color.

Yellow journalism. Yellow = TDF winner's jersey, get it? Ah never mind.

it's a federal offense to lie to the Feds. So Hincapie is obviously loyal, but not stupid.

I think Hincapie has a lot more credibility than Landis and Hamilton. That said, this changes pretty much nothing.

Fixed for accuracy. Like I said, you get enough eyewitnesses in Federal court and sooner or later you can't say they all lack credibility. That's when the jury throws you under the bus.

The wrinkle here is the government connection to the primary sponsor the US Postal Service. If the main sponsor had been Acme Corporation the Feds would have no cause to investigate here.

http://cdn.screenrant.com/wp-content...ACME-movie.jpg

Agreed, when your theory of the case is that they are all lying, you're in trouble.

The prosecution has a number of problems in proving a crime, within the statute of limitations, but its getting very very difficult to believe Armstrong never used PED's.

Actually it has been impossible to believe that for years. Now it's starting to look like the threat of prison may finally crack the pro cycling wall of silence. Hey, the truth will out. Sooner or later. Lance is smart enough to understand that. The one exception to this rule is the US banking lobby, the truth never gets out there. Too much money is at stake.

I just don't think any of this changes the essential Lance story. Not if you understand pro cycling it doesn't. But the world doesn't understand pro cycling, and they'll widely view Lance as a 'cheat' and a 'fraud'. The real fraud is the willingness of world sports fans to believe guys can climb L Alp in 38 minutes on coffee and power bars, and the real problem is the inability of pro cycling's governing body to contend with an ever escalating biological PED arms race.

Pro sports aren't sports. It's a multi zillion dollar global industry. It's BUSINESS. Applying sportsmanship standards and ideals that work on a high school field to that arena is naive at best.

I'd always wanted to believe Lance never used, but realisitically thought he probably did. Big George's testimony just tipped me to 100%...assuming the story is accurate.


EDIT: This story just goes to show you that the coverup is always worse than the crime.

You forgot the mineral water.:p

They could send Lance to the slammer you know. Maybe he'll start a cycling team there.

You don't frequent the 217

As a long time fan and spectator, I have a reasonably realistic view of and a passing familiarity with pro cycling however. Some of the crap I read about the sport here is pretty silly.

Stationary bikes of course.

Seriously, why does anyone even care?

Of course he doped. 99% of all professional athletes on this frickin planet does. in every conceivable sport. and its been this way atleast since the 50's.

how is any of this at all surprising?

If you're Davis Phinney, i.e. the Father of a talented kid trying to become a sucessful pro, you care.

If you had a talented child, would you like your child to have to decide to either 1) take drugs, illegally, against the rules, and potentially threatening your health, if not your life, or 2) give up any chance of realizing your dream to be a pro.

That's pretty much what the choice has been for a number of years, and anybody that cares about competitive cycling, or their kids has reason to care.

It's not surprising. It's just a commentary on the nature of competition. When it is the one dominant factor in a person's life, they will do nearly anything, consequences be damned, to get a leg up.

ok well that perspective makes sense. i guess i was coming more from a cycling enthusiast's/fan's perspective.

i mean, realistically, doping is here and its here to stay. its unfortunate but its true. no amount of regulation is going to stop it.

but then again, in many respects doping can be seen as a more of an equalizer. lets face it, these top tier athletes are genetic freaks. sure a lot of hard work and dedication is involved, but they still have that DNA basis that gives them that chance to be the best, which most other of us never have.

maybe doping gives some people the oppurtunity to exceed the boundaries of their genetics and allow them to accomplish and work hard for things they would not otherwise have been able to do

note: im not condoning or encouraging doping

Wonder how Armstrong's PR machine will respond. Landis and Hamilton were relatively easy marks in terms of attacking their credibility. Hincapie not so. As a matter of fact, he's pretty much beyond reproach.

My thoughts on all this are somewhat conflicted. I can't get too worked up about it, given that it's been widely known that PEDs have been rampant in cycling.

But at the same time, I don't think you can just say forget it, and not try to curtail it for my reasons set forth above.

Yeah. Wow, this* is huge.



*I have to put the "if true" disclaimer here...don't want Lance coming after me. All parties are presumed innocent until proven guilty, etc.. Also: yay! A doping thread!

No, the vast majority of pro athletes certainly never dope, and the fact that anyone can blithely state that '99%' do is the saddest commentary why doping in sports isn't tolerable. The most compelling argument against doping is we don't want our kids doing it in high school, which is inevitable if we don't get a handle on this scourge. You can't have it. It's not acceptable. Particularly for the business of pro cycling, which has been decimated as the pool of sponsor money has gotten more and more shallow as companies fear being associated with the profoundly negative publicity doping can bring to them. That totally obviates the reason they get into the sport in the first, place, which is for positive exposure. There are no ticket sales in cycling, no massive revenue streams like they have in the NFL, MLB, Euro Football, the NBA, etc. It matters much more to pro cycling than any other sport. Top salaries in cycling are actually LOWER now than they were a few years ago as the money has dried up. It's hitting everyone who makes a living from the sport.

Doping was rampant, widespread and quite systematic in pro cycling in Lance's era. But this does not change the basic outline of his inspiring story. Not really. Still, it will be a major crash and burn, and it will suck for a lot of reasons. But ultimately if it helps clean up cycling (it can't hurt) maybe it's all for the best. I strongly feel that if you have a brain in your head and you understand the long standing realities of pro cycling, then the Lance story hasn't changed despite all this. But those two attributes aren't easy to find, particularly on BF. Characterizing the doping that's being re-hased with the Lance case (and it is massive re-hasing) as 'cheating' is simplistic in the extreme, it understates the true insidious nature of the problem, and makes it sound like if we could just get some good, clean honest guys into the sport it would all simply resolve itself. As if.

I'll say.

The last one out of Livestrong can turn out the lights.

How long ago was that thread where I said that George doped and Allez told me I was wrong. If there was ever a time to say "I told you so" this would be it. Good thing I'm above that huh?

I wonder if we should prepare for a massive public burning (melting?) of Livestrong bracelets?