# lance armstrong



## 29ernb (Mar 20, 2012)

nice to see him racing in the xterra world championships in maui


----------



## CS2 (Jul 24, 2007)

jeffgothro said:


> I heard/read/watched somewhere he is a doper (but its also or was very controversial?) I dont know for certain?


Why would you say it then? He never tested positive for a banned substance. When he raced he was piss tested literally all day.


----------



## jeffgothro (Mar 10, 2007)

I heard/read/watched somewhere he is a doper, they even gave a race time line (but its also or was very controversial?) I dont know for certain?


----------



## Flying-Monkey (Apr 15, 2012)

Haters gonna hate...


----------



## jeffgothro (Mar 10, 2007)

I assume thats torwards me, I dont hate, if its true, then thats sad. But if its not, I'm totally behind the guy, I aint a roadie, and I hate road bikes, but I still respect when its earned...I DONT ACTUALLY KNOW IF HE EARNED IT. Its that simple.

If what I read about him is wrong - cool, and my bad - prove it.


----------



## G8TR (May 10, 2012)

I think it's awesome seeing Lance ride off road, and even occasionally enter a foot race. The guy is incredible.


----------



## FastZR1 (Aug 10, 2008)

jeffgothro said:


> I assume thats torwards me, I dont hate, if its true, then thats sad. But if its not, I'm totally behind the guy, I aint a roadie, and I hate road bikes, but I still respect when its earned...I DONT ACTUALLY KNOW IF HE EARNED IT. Its that simple.
> 
> If what I read about him is wrong - cool, and my bad - prove it.


Guilty until proven innocent, huh?

Can't believe everything you read or hear. It use to be innocent until proven guilty.

OP- yea, good to see him doing Xterras.


----------



## PretendGentleman (May 24, 2011)

I"m definitely suspicious, but since congress backed off, we'll likely never know for sure. 

Regardless, Americans are a hell of a lot more interested in bikes than before, and I think that benefits cyclists of any ilk.


----------



## jeffgothro (Mar 10, 2007)

FastZR1 said:


> Guilty until proven innocent, huh?
> 
> Can't believe everything you read or hear. It use to be innocent until proven guilty.
> 
> OP- yea, good to see him doing Xterras.


Exactly, to a certain extent, you cant believe everything you read or hear, I agree, but, I havent heard or read anything that proves it to the contrary, so...

(actually, I see where this is going, and its probably more my fault than anything, so, nevermind...) :nono:


----------



## MTBeing (Jan 11, 2012)

2009 Leadville 100. I don't care what others say about the guy, he's done alot for the sport of cycling (including MTB).


----------



## Stugotz (Dec 14, 2011)

I'll preface this by stating what I'm about to post is not intended to start a flame war, only to let people know that this whole thing is not over yet.

I have friends that road race professionally and they have told me that the issues are far from over for Lance. They have told me there is a strong possibility of Lance's TDF victories/titles being stripped from him for starters. The Grand Jury's focus has shifted now to Floyd Landis and is grinding forward.

If you would like to do some reading on all of this her is a forum that is frequented by some current and former amateur and professional roadies.

The Clinic - Cycling News Forum.

(I'm only passing on what I've been told from others that are in-tuned with what's going on behind the scenes. Please don't shoot the messenger).


----------



## Centurion_ (Aug 13, 2011)

So many of the Great road professionals have used banned substances (caffiene in a dosage stronger than three cups of coffee is a banned substance, BTW) , that it's hard to get excited about a pro cyclist using them. I mean....Pantanni, Contrador, Ullrich, Hamilton, Landis, and so many many more who have served out suspensions or been outright kicked off the pro circut alltogether.

I don't endorse it, but it appears to be a fact of life on the pro circuit. And while the verdict is still out on Lance...who I happen to respect a lot), the reality is...this is all too common in professional cycling. 

A few get caught. Most don't.


----------



## Eric Z (Sep 28, 2008)

+1 on lance doing good things for road and mtb'ing.


----------



## 29ernb (Mar 20, 2012)

G8TR said:


> I think it's awesome seeing Lance ride off road, and even occasionally enter a foot race. The guy is incredible.


during the race, while mountain biking, he fell off his bike and his head hit a tree. he got right back up and got back on his bike and continued on. a true competitor


----------



## KEITH21 (Aug 1, 2011)

jeffgothro said:


> I assume thats torwards me, I dont hate, if its true, then thats sad. But if its not, I'm totally behind the guy, I aint a roadie, and I hate road bikes, but I still respect when its earned...I DONT ACTUALLY KNOW IF HE EARNED IT. Its that simple.
> 
> If what I read about him is wrong - cool, and my bad - prove it.


You can start by showing proof that he did first.


----------



## KEITH21 (Aug 1, 2011)

Eric Z said:


> +1 on lance doing good things for road and mtb'ing.


+1 on what Lance has done for cancer research too.


----------



## Eric Z (Sep 28, 2008)

KEITH21 said:


> +1 on what Lance has done for cancer research too.


totally! good one. and also for health and exercise in general.


----------



## m3bas (Dec 24, 2011)

Its irrelevant whether or not he was a doper to the results, all the people he beat have since been implicated (Basso, Ullrich, Pantani, etc). It was a "level" playing field as they were all doing the same thing.


----------



## Nubster (May 15, 2009)

m3bas said:


> Its irrelevant whether or not he was a doper to the results, all the people he beat have since been implicated (Basso, Ullrich, Pantani, etc). It was a "level" playing field as they were all doing the same thing.


BINGO! If Lance dopes or used to dope, he was beating the others at their own game. If he didn't, well, that's even more respect that the guy deserves. Regardless, he's done more than 99.9% of the population could ever do, doped or not.


----------



## Centurion_ (Aug 13, 2011)

Nubster said:


> BINGO! If Lance dopes or used to dope, he was beating the others at their own game.


Can't argue with that. That's professional cycling. It is what it is...


----------



## westeast (Nov 27, 2010)

jeffgothro said:


> I assume thats torwards me, I dont hate, if its true, then thats sad. But if its not, I'm totally behind the guy, I aint a roadie, and I hate road bikes, but I still respect when its earned...I DONT ACTUALLY KNOW IF HE EARNED IT. Its that simple.
> 
> If what I read about him is wrong - cool, and my bad - prove it.


Can't prove a negative (sort of).

Maybe you're a paid troll of the French press and are trying to stir up support AGAINST Lance. I will assume the very real possibility of this until you PROVE to me that this is NOT true.


----------



## Tystevens (Nov 2, 2011)

m3bas said:


> Its irrelevant whether or not he was a doper to the results, all the people he beat have since been implicated (Basso, Ullrich, Pantani, etc). It was a "level" playing field as they were all doing the same thing.


Pretty much ^this^.


----------



## AZ (Apr 14, 2009)

This tired argument again?


----------



## ImaFred (May 16, 2009)

USADA is still looking at stripping his tdf victories....so far from over.
Last year he raced xterra as well, and it was awesome seeing C. Stoltz reel him in and pass him on the bike leg.


----------



## zenboy99 (Feb 2, 2007)

Stugotz said:


> I'll preface this by stating what I'm about to post is not intended to start a flame war, only to let people know that this whole thing is not over yet.
> 
> I have friends that road race professionally and they have told me that the issues are far from over for Lance. They have told me there is a strong possibility of Lance's TDF victories/titles being stripped from him for starters. The Grand Jury's focus has shifted now to Floyd Landis and is grinding forward.


Totally agree. I have friends that are pro cyclists as well who say the same thing. The FDA was investigating whether government money was used to purchase doping products. His case can still go to USADA


----------



## 29ernb (Mar 20, 2012)

the federal doping investigation with lance armstrong was dropped. they don't have the evidence to back the allegations.

Lance Armstrong relieved after federal doping investigation is dropped | Sport | guardian.co.uk

france hates the fact that a american cyclist won the tour de france 7 times in a row. they are going to just complain about it forever. that last time a rider from france won was back in 1985.


----------



## weasy (Jan 13, 2004)

People tend to forget he lost a nad and went through chemo. That within itself can temper your sole to overcome any challenge.. What doesn't kill you makes you stronger. I don't judge whether he did it legal or illegal. As others have stated, the field was pretty level. He has always been very forthcoming that he has been super scrutinized and tested just for the sake of being tested.

I do think he is a positive role model for the sport and for the cancer cause and has given much more back and helped more folks than any of you haters can say. I am no fanboy by any means, though I do take pride in wearing my Mellow Johnnies jersey and I do feel faster on the days I wear it imagining I am battling Alpe d'Huez.

Enjoy life while you can. Be glad you can ride and go ride.


----------



## Spinning Lizard (Nov 27, 2009)

KEITH21 said:


> +1 on what Lance has done for cancer research too.


That is the biggest bunch of crap ever written. Name ONE thing he has done for cancer research? And don't go saying Livestrong, because not one dime of that money goes to cancer research.


----------



## Nubster (May 15, 2009)

Spinning Lizard said:


> That is the biggest bunch of crap ever written. Name ONE thing he has done for cancer research? And don't go saying Livestrong, because not one dime of that money goes to cancer research.


Actually, Livestrong has given something like $20million to cancer research. They have however stopped giving money, but they did give it in the past. So in fact Lance's organization has sent 2,000,000 dimes to cancer research.


----------



## Spinning Lizard (Nov 27, 2009)

Nubster said:


> Actually, Livestrong has given something like $20million to cancer research. They have however stopped giving money, but they did give it in the past. So in fact Lance's organization has sent 2,000,000 dimes to cancer research.


Wrong! Provide a link. They gave it to cancer awareness, never a dime to research.


----------



## PretendGentleman (May 24, 2011)

Spinning Lizard said:


> That is the biggest bunch of crap ever written. Name ONE thing he has done for cancer research? And don't go saying Livestrong, because not one dime of that money goes to cancer research.





Spinning Lizard said:


> Wrong! Provide a link. They gave it to cancer awareness, never a dime to research.


that's pretty nauseating. If people donate thinking that their money goes to research, which i bet a lot probably did, then livestrong is effectively stealing money from cancer research. I'd like to hear more about this before I form much more of a negative opinion.


----------



## Spinning Lizard (Nov 27, 2009)

PretendGentleman said:


> that's pretty nauseating. If people donate thinking that their money goes to research, which i bet a lot probably did, then livestrong is effectively stealing money from cancer research. I'd like to hear more about this before I form much more of a negative opinion.


I agree. makes me sick. Don't really care about the doping, but this is a sly way to make a buck.

Do a google search on Livestrong and you will see everything says awareness, never do you see research. But people think it is the same thing, it just is not.

Here are a couple

About Cancer Awareness Ribbons | LIVESTRONG.COM

Lung Cancer Awareness | LIVESTRONG.COM

This from the Livestrong Site

Where the Money Goes

LIVESTRONG endeavors to be the best possible stewards of the outstanding financial commitments made by its donors and partners and to leverage those funds in the global fight against cancer.

We gratefully thank our donors on behalf of the people served through your generosity.

Making a donation-at any level-can be a complex and difficult decision. For that reason, we are as transparent as possible about how we have been, and will continue to be, good stewards of your gifts.

Since our inception, we have raised more than $400 million dollars for the fight against cancer, and 81 percent of those funds have gone directly to support our programs and services for survivors.

2010
In 2010 we had functional expenses totaling $35,746,206, and 81 percent of every dollar raised went directly to programmatic funding totaling $28,954,426. See the charts below for a breakdown of functional as well as programmatic expenses.

2009
In 2009 we had functional expenses totaling $37,147, 929, and 81 percent of every dollar raised went directly to fund programmatic expenses (see chart below).

Financial Information
Our annual reports, 501(c)(3) letter and more.

Learn More
Donate Now
Support the fight against cancer with your gift.

Learn More
More Giving Options
Learn about the many ways you can donate to LIVESTRONG.

Learn More
What We Do
We look at the experiences of the cancer community, find problems and develop solutions.

Learn More

NO RESEARCH!


----------



## Nubster (May 15, 2009)

Spinning Lizard said:


> Wrong! Provide a link. They gave it to cancer awareness, never a dime to research.


Between 1998 and 2005, $20mil of research grants were given out. Here is an article. Read it. It's actually an article uncovering some of what is really going on, not one that is singing the praises of Lance and Livestrong so I would tend to believe it. I'm not defending them, just pointing out that there was some money given, not ZERO as you want to say. I mean in reality, $20 million is nothing, especially over the span of 7 years, but it is more then nothing.

Lance Armstrong and Livestrong - Page 1 | Lance Armstrong | OutsideOnline.com


----------



## Flying-Monkey (Apr 15, 2012)

Just to look at it from another angle... how much of this actually has to do with Lance? Is he the sole person behind Livestrong, or is he just the face they use to sell whatever it is they're selling.

I don't know, and have not yet looked it up.


----------



## Nubster (May 15, 2009)

PretendGentleman said:


> that's pretty nauseating. If people donate thinking that their money goes to research, which i bet a lot probably did, then livestrong is effectively stealing money from cancer research. I'd like to hear more about this before I form much more of a negative opinion.


But who's fault is it? I skimmed over both LiveStrong sites and nowhere did I read or get the impression that money was being given for research. To me, it seems pretty obvious that the money is being used for education programs, support to cancer patients and survivors. If people are making the assumption that money is going to research and not checking into that themselves and donating blindly, then that's on them.


----------



## Nubster (May 15, 2009)

Flying-Monkey said:


> Just to look at it from another angle... how much of this actually has to do with Lance? Is he the sole person behind Livestrong, or is he just the face they use to sell whatever it is they're selling.
> 
> I don't know, and have not yet looked it up.


Lance started the Lance Armstrong Foundation which eventually became LiveStrong. He is the face of LiveStrong, but now it's a large company with employees, a CEO, corporate sponsors like Nike, ect. I think he still does a lot of promotional stuff but not sure how involved he is in the actual running of the company.


----------



## frntrngcactus (Mar 1, 2005)

*I dont care*



Nubster said:


> BINGO! If Lance dopes or used to dope, he was beating the others at their own game. If he didn't, well, that's even more respect that the guy deserves. Regardless, he's done more than 99.9% of the population could ever do, doped or not.


I dont care if he doped or not. I think he did a lot for Road biking and Mtn biking and whatever LiveStrong is doing I dont think it is hurting anyone, I know if he wasnt around I would have never gotten on a bike past the age of 16. He is an inspiration to many people and its hard to knock him for that.


----------



## 53119 (Nov 7, 2008)

when and if the S*#t hits the fan the fan won't be on anyway. It's a pretty tired subject. what are they gonna do interrupt houswives of new jersey for breaking news?


----------



## AZ (Apr 14, 2009)

*Lance gives it up,*

Lance Armstrong appears to suggest he won


----------



## pointerDixie214 (Feb 10, 2009)

The dude may be a complete and total d.b.... but no one can argue he is one of the greatest athletes of our time. Dope or not, he does things none of us could even dream of even if we had all the dope in the world. 

Absolutely amazing athlete. Complete and total egomaniac. But I can hardly blame the guy. lol


----------



## whoda*huck (Feb 12, 2005)

jeffgothro said:


> Exactly, to a certain extent, you cant believe everything you read or hear, I agree, but, I havent heard or read anything that proves it to the contrary, so...
> 
> :


...I'll go ahead and repeat it on a public forum. 

To the OP: that's kinda old news, the Xterra world championship was almost 7 months ago.

Regardless of his guilt or innocence there's no denying the huge boost he's given to cycling in general.


----------



## bamwa (Mar 15, 2010)

Can't we all just livemedium?


----------



## AZ (Apr 14, 2009)

bamwa1 said:


> Can't we all just livemedium?


I prefer "LiveWrong".


----------



## bedwards1000 (May 31, 2011)

I would much prefer that my tax dollars go toward cancer research than to pay federal prosecutors one more cent to investigate this case. He's a great athlete and if he actually did dope he was great at that too considering that the only evidence against him is hearsay. Either way I could really care less right now.

As far as not funding future research, so what. The foundation supports people that have cancer and their families. If you don't want to support people with cancer, don't give. Research doesn't do a thing for somebody that is already dying with the disease.


----------



## Bigfoot (Jan 16, 2004)

bedwards1000 said:


> ...considering that the only evidence against him is hearsay.


You hold a common misconception on the meaning of the term "hearsay," especially in the legal sense.

To give an example: If someone had told Hincapie or Leipheimer or Landis or Hamilton that they had seen Lance doping, and then if Hincapie or Leipheimer or Landis or Hamilton testified of having heard that to a grand jury or other legal investigative or enforcement agency, THAT would be *hearsay* testimony.

However if Hincapie, Leipheimer, Landis or Hamilton told that same grand jury or other legal investigative or enforcement agency of having personally witnessed Lance doping, then THAT is *eye-witness testimony*.

There is a huge difference between the two. Heresay testimony carries virtually no weight. Eye witness testimony can lead to guilty verdicts.


----------



## Lenny7 (Sep 1, 2008)

Bigfoot said:


> There is a huge difference between the two. Heresay testimony carries virtually no weight. Eye witness testimony can lead to guilty verdicts.


Doesn't matter what legal dictionary your are reading from, there still is no case.


----------



## Bigfoot (Jan 16, 2004)

Lenny7 said:


> Doesn't matter what legal dictionary your are reading from, there still is no case.


True, no case, simply because the plugged was mysteriously pulled. But that's not to say that there's no evidence. Far from it. Give this a look.

End of Lance Armstrong federal investigation raises questions - ESPN

_"Several witnesses who testified before the federal grand jury in Los Angeles or spoke to investigators said they were stunned by the news. Other sources close to the case said investigators had described their evidence against Armstrong as being the strongest of any of the government's doping-related cases."_


----------



## bedwards1000 (May 31, 2011)

Unless they actually witnessed him putting a needle in his arm I think we're back to hearsay. Either way I still don't really care. He's done a lot for the sport and the cause either way and I think both would be better served if it just got dropped.


----------



## Tails8 (Apr 27, 2010)

What was this topic about again??? 

Tails


----------



## ImaFred (May 16, 2009)

The proverbial shiznit has hit the fan....
USADA letter paints dark picture of Armstrong era


----------



## crewjones (Aug 24, 2007)

Yep he's back in the Hot Seat


----------



## AZ (Apr 14, 2009)

The wheels of justice turn ever so slowly.


----------



## Trail Addict (Nov 20, 2011)

Who cares? The guy is a prodigy regardless if he used drugs or not.


----------



## skiahh (Dec 26, 2003)

It seems the USADA is trying to have its cake and eat it too. 

What happens when they "convict" Armstrong based on people's stories and the next guy pops positive on a test... but no one's ever seen him dope?

If they go after him solely on the basis of people's stories, they effectively discredit their own science by saying the hundreds or thousands of tests either don't matter or were wrong. 

It seems to me they can't have it both ways.


----------



## crewjones (Aug 24, 2007)

Yeah, it should be put to rest already. Regardless of doping or not, Armstrong is still an incredible cyclist and deserves the championships. Doesn't matter at this point


----------



## PandaPancake (Jun 14, 2012)

Anyone brought up the fact that he didn't have a significant jump in performance? Which I don't know about you but if I was doping on all the stuff that he was supposedly on I could finish races twice and still beat everyone. I also don't think (my opinion!) that he would do that kind of harm to his body. He seems too much of a health nut for that.


----------



## G8TR (May 10, 2012)

It appears to me they are going after his managers, coaches and doctors in an effort to get more than or person to "flip" on him to save their own butts. If they can get more than one of them to colloberate stories that Lance was a doper, they will go after him for doping and perjury. It's a cheap tactic because some people will say anything to save their own butts.


----------



## whoda*huck (Feb 12, 2005)

BFD. If the usada finds him guilty they'll give him a lifetime ban from the sport he retired from a year ago.


----------



## big terry (Apr 22, 2012)




----------



## Stugotz (Dec 14, 2011)

whodaphuck said:


> BFD. If the usada finds him guilty they'll give him a lifetime ban from the sport he retired from a year ago.


He considers himself a triathlete now and the ban would also keep him from competing in any of these events not to mention the Leadville 100 or any other MTB race.


----------



## IPSC shooter (Mar 5, 2012)

I'm calling BS. Ryan Braun gets off because of a technically after failling a test. LA past 500. I'm sure if he failled it would have made the front page arround the world. Everbody should be able to sleep tonight, because apparently all other crimes/problems in sports have been solved. I'm assuming this is tax money being spent? If so then the rest of our problems have been solved.


----------



## bedwards1000 (May 31, 2011)

I'm pretty pissed that now we don't get to see how he does in the ironman after setting the new course record in the half. :madmax: He's still breaking records at 40 and I'm pretty sure he's not on the crack pipe right now with all the attention on it even if at some point in his cycling career he might have doing the same thing every other cyclist was.:skep:


----------



## MTBNate (Apr 6, 2004)

I'm pissed that my tax dollars are being wasted on this sh!t...

This is a vastly worse waste of Federal dollars than the GSA's Las Vegas Conferences scandal.


----------



## Lenny7 (Sep 1, 2008)

It's such a joke at this point. They have 10 guys who say they saw him dope, but no + test? So, all Armstrong has to do is get 11 guys to say they never saw him dope. If they start baning people based solely on peoples testimony they are opening up a BIG can of worms. Why bother testing just interview people.


----------



## MTBNate (Apr 6, 2004)

Wish there was someone we could email a complaint about wasting $'s on this crap.

Oh wait:

Meet Us | U.S. Anti-Doping Agency (USADA)

_Edit: Looks like the USADA is a *non-governmental* agency.

However, the USADA receives funding through a grant from the United States government. The agency also has a contractual agreement with the USOC for conducting an Olympic Anti-Doping Program, testing U.S. athletes and the adjudication process for doping violations. The 2009 budget for USADA is $13.3 million, with approximately 74% from the federal government and 26% from the USOC._

In that light, I think I'll write my Congressional delegation.


----------



## FLMike (Sep 28, 2008)

MTBNate said:


> Wish there was someone we could email a complaint about wasting $'s on this crap.
> 
> Oh wait:
> 
> Meet Us | U.S. Anti-Doping Agency (USADA)


Out of curiousity I decided to see how much the USADA gets from the government... I found this from 2009 and 2010.. https://www.usada.org/ar-audit-report


----------



## Debaser (Jan 12, 2004)

Lance Armstrong Wants To Tell Nation Something But Nation Has To Promise Not To Get Mad | The Onion - America's Finest News Source


----------



## cjohnson (Jul 14, 2004)

*this burns me too.*

Dope or not dope, Let us keep the illusion. I sent them an email suggesting they stop testing and only rely on witnesses.


----------



## zenboy99 (Feb 2, 2007)

Lenny7 said:


> It's such a joke at this point. They have 10 guys who say they saw him dope, but no + test? So, all Armstrong has to do is get 11 guys to say they never saw him dope. If they start baning people based solely on peoples testimony they are opening up a BIG can of worms. Why bother testing just interview people.


As an analytical chemist who has spent several hours with Floyd Landis and Tyler Hamilton, I can tell you that the issue is Landis and Hamilton revealed HOW Lance was passing all of the tests by microdosing at very distinct levels. Don't forget, his old physiologist Dr. Ferrari helped develop the EPO test. Very convenient.


----------



## zenboy99 (Feb 2, 2007)

This link answers some questions in this thread:

USADA's actions on Lance Armstrong start series of events that could strip him of Tour de France titles - ESPN


----------



## Lenny7 (Sep 1, 2008)

Meet Us | U.S. Anti-Doping Agency (USADA)
I just sent an email to several of the directors telling them what I thought.


----------



## Whitenoiz (Jun 14, 2012)

I was just reading a bunch of articles about this. Pretty disappointing that we wont get to see him in Hawaii unless this gets cleared up fast.


----------



## Stugotz (Dec 14, 2011)

*Don't forget to bid on a chance to experience Kona with Lance! Oh, wait...*


----------



## bee (Apr 7, 2008)

Armstrong and his public relations firm just need to give it up. There are 10+ former teammates who are eyewitnesses to the doping that Armstrong did to win the Tours. I used to be a fan, but he is not getting a pass from me anymore.

Armstrong is a fraud. He lied, cheated, and basically got away with millions from his cheating with USPS. Armstrong is the governmental money waster here. No now else. Time to fess up.


----------



## Guest (Jun 14, 2012)

Remember kids, its all about winning; and if you have to cheat make damn sure you don't get caught!


----------



## bee (Apr 7, 2008)

miwuksurfer said:


> Remember kids, its all about winning; and if you have to cheat make damn sure you don't get caught!


Live strong, but so wrong.


----------



## The Prodigal Son (Apr 22, 2008)

I wish we could discuss each and every point being made, in detail. Forums take on a life of there own and misinformation and distortions are quickly passed off as fact. 

Did you ever give driving advice to someone, telling them they can get away with speeding if they just go 8-9mph over the limit, but not ten or more? How much dope can an athlete use without going over the threshold? Lance kept it just under. Floyd went over. One is admired and a multi-millionare. The other is a loser and a snitch. 

If everyone in pro cycling is cheating, the playing field is level and Lance is the best cheater out there. Some had made this observation. Does that encourage or discourage a young rider moving into the pro ranks, to ride clean? 

Some whine about there tax dollars. This seems hilarious. If you are an American citizen, maybe you need to take a look at the National Debt, and remember that the people you keep voting into office are guilty of spending a 1000x more than any investigation of illegal drug use will ever spend.

Some are saying he has been tested hundreds of times and never tested positive. That's somewhat true. He never tested positive enough. Also, if you follow track and field, as I do, they are also clever cheaters and dopers. Marion Jones cried at press conferences for years, claiming she was tested hundreds of times and never tested positive. How did she get away with it all those years. Simple. She was using designer drugs made by BALCO. The only way to get caught was if someone got their hands on a sample of the drugs and reverse engineeered them, to come up with a test for them. WELL, that is exactly what happened to Marion, after she refused to pay off her coach. He handed over a syringe of her drugs to the feds and they caught her and many others. They also raided BALCO and discovered she was sending checks with her name on them to pay for the drugs. 

Some are saying, why ignore test results and listen to mere witnesses? Seriously? It has been proven there are ways to fool the tests. You may not believe one witness. You may discredit one or two witnesses. But when you get a bunch of witnesses and they have specific recollections that are backed up by others, it builds a strong case.

Back to Marion Jones for a moment. For those who don't know her, she was the best 100 meter runner in the world. She dated a shot puter. He got busted for doping just prior to the Olympic Games in Australia in 2000. Marion cried at the press conference. Other Americans scheduled to compete, fled the country, knowing they had the same supplier of drugs. One woman, Regina Jacobs, was a favorite to win the womens 1500 meter run. She suddenly flew back to the U.S., saying she became upset when a bellboy at her hotel called her an aborigine. Various track athletes that were caught, had even more lame excuses. They claimed their nutritionists must have given them something without telling them. One American won the World 100 meter championship and tested positive. She explained it was her narcolepsy medicine her physician was giving her that made her test positive. Her doctor stated it was news to him she even had narcolepsy. 

So Marion has something in common with Lance. Marion surrounded herself with cheaters. After she dumped her disgraced doping boyfriend, she married a sprinter. He was a good sprinter. Within a year, he was the world record holder in the 100 meter dash. He was later busted with Marion and banned for life. Marion had hired the disgraced coach who once trained Canadian 100 meter champ Ben Johnson. Lance was good friends with and hired the famous EPO cheat Doctor Michelle Ferrari. He had a long-term relationship with him. Marion actually flew to the Sidney Olympics sitting next to the owner of BALCO, Victor Conte. Lance and his team were made up of people willing to go along with the program. Winning was the objective. The people prescribing their performance drugs were several steps ahead of any testing going on, just as it is today. But Lance surrounded himself with cheats. If you want to win clean, you don't allow yourself in the company of cheats. Lance sought them out, paid them handsomely, and got the best they had. 

Guilty people get away with it all the time. Politicians, athletes, priests, women who kill their own kids. It's wrong, even if they once were great running backs or great bike riders, or someone you voted for when they were John Kerry's VP. If you want to reduce the cheating by pro cyclists in the future, the best person you can go after, is the poster boy for why cheating is worth the risk, Lance Armstrong, as well as his enabling support team.


----------



## Lenny7 (Sep 1, 2008)

Marion Jones was married to shot-putter CJ Hunter. Not a sprinter.


----------



## The Prodigal Son (Apr 22, 2008)

Lenny7 said:


> Marion Jones was married to shot-putter CJ Hunter. Not a sprinter.


That's all you have to comment on? Are you kiding me? Are you a lawyer or something? Marion married CJ. She dumped him when he got busted. She met Tim Montgomery and had a son with him. He doped and became world champ at 100 meters. She and Tim got busted. She said only Tim was using the drugs despite her checks that were found at BALCO.

Now, did I have any grammar errors or did I miss something major like her sons name or the type of toothpaste she uses? Stay focused. This is about Lance cheating and what patterns a cheater often follows.



> It's such a joke at this point. They have 10 guys who say they saw him dope, but no + test? So, all Armstrong has to do is get 11 guys to say they never saw him dope. If they start baning people based solely on peoples testimony they are opening up a BIG can of worms. Why bother testing just interview people.


Now it makes more sense. Your calling something a joke that you have limited knowledge about. You have not seen the testimony of the witnesses. And they aren't just ten guys. They aren't people who called in anonymously. They are long-time professional riders, trusted teammates, accomplished men who were often in the same room as Lance. They were asked specific questions and testified, under oath, that there was a culture of cheating. They were expected to cheat if they wanted to be on the team. There is no can of worms. They have positive tests. They have other tests that were just under the threshold to get busted. Eyewitness testimony is compelling and adds to other evidence. Part of the other evidence is the history of a disgraced doctor, Michele Ferrari, who despite his involvement with riders caught doping, and testimony by pro rider Fillippo Simeoni, who discussed how Dr. Ferrari created a plan for drug use and a plan to use Emagel to to decrease Hematocrit counts on the morning of testing.

So, you would throw out convictions of criminals if they were convicted because of eyewitness testimony? Anything else? Throw out DNA evidence, throw out video tape evidence, crime scene evidence? How about confessions? Are they best tossed out as well?


----------



## BCTJ (Aug 22, 2011)

I think its a waste of time and money. Leave the guy alone. Even if he cheated, its highly likely that everyone else cheated too...which leveled the playing field. Why are American agencies so intent on destroying an international American champion? At least they could waste our money trying to destroy some foreigner rather than wasting our money by shooting our international reputation in the foot.


----------



## baker (Jan 6, 2004)

BlackCanyonTrailJunkie said:


> At least they could waste our money trying to destroy some foreigner rather than wasting our money by shooting our international reputation in the foot.


----------



## The Prodigal Son (Apr 22, 2008)

BlackCanyonTrailJunkie said:


> I think its a waste of time and money. Leave the guy alone. Even if he cheated, its highly likely that everyone else cheated too...which leveled the playing field. Why are American agencies so intent on destroying an international American champion? At least they could waste our money trying to destroy some foreigner rather than wasting our money by shooting our international reputation in the foot.


So what we want is an international reputation built on cheating, doping, lying, and ignoring evidence of wrong-doing?

A waste of who's time and money? Not yours. If you don't investigate the most famous of cheaters in a sport know for doping, why investigate any dope related athletes?

Does it bother you that the U.S. Postal Service is bankrupt, yet they funded a cycling team using some of their funding to pay for drugs and doctors to administer those illegal drugs? No. it doesn't bother you. But wasted time is something that really concerns you, right?

Nobody is intent on destroying an international champion. They are seeking the truth, seeking justice. Why is that so wrong for some to accept.

It really bothers people when criminals get acquited by juries, even though their guilt is obvious. People get fired up over those cases of injustice and jury nullification. But if anyone tries to accuse a famous athlete of breaking the law, mobs of angry fans want to attack the people investigating the crime. Laws don't apply to athletes, I guess. Wait, laws don't apply to winning athletes. By all accounts, from former lovers and teammates and others he has known, Lance Armstrong is a jerk, a shallow human being obsessed with winning bike races at any cost. He has thrown everyone who stood in his way of winning, under the nearest team-sponsored bus. If his long-time friend and team director, Johan Bruyneel rolls over on Lance, and testifies about all the doping he was doing, Lance will spend whatever it takes to discredit him and make his life miserable.

Lance is no hero. He was a talented bike rider who chose to take illegal shortcuts to fame and fortune.


----------



## bee (Apr 7, 2008)

Dear Internet Scholar,
While it is much appreciated that your dissertations are the length of a high school essay, could you please keep your thoughts to a few sentences? Thanks.

Sincerely,
Rider with an extremely high IQ, but extremely low attention span


----------



## big terry (Apr 22, 2012)

the prodigal son said:


> i wish we could discuss each and every point being made, in detail. Forums take on a life of there own and misinformation and distortions are quickly passed off as fact.
> 
> Did you ever give driving advice to someone, telling them they can get away with speeding if they just go 8-9mph over the limit, but not ten or more? How much dope can an athlete use without going over the threshold? Lance kept it just under. Floyd went over. One is admired and a multi-millionare. The other is a loser and a snitch.
> 
> ...


tldr.


----------



## likeaboss (Jan 1, 2012)

So what about those thresholds. Why have a threshold? If your test results are under the threshold, are you cheating? 

If he didn't test positive, and he was injecting(any amount), then the tests are flawed. 

And who cares what the guy is like. What does that have to do with anything other than the fact that his ex-teammates(proven liars) may be more willing to lie to see him fall.

There were teammates that were with Lance and then left to ride for competing teams. Why didn't they say anything? If Lance is such a DB to everyone, why not bring him down in his prime?

My whole problem with this is that it is happening now. It just feels like they are grasping at straws. I am not saying he did or did not cheat but why is this relevant now and not when he was winning?


----------



## bedwards1000 (May 31, 2011)

The Prodigal Son said:


> Lance is no hero. He was a talented bike rider who chose to take illegal shortcuts to fame and fortune.


BuIIshit, by your own analogy if you are driving 5mph over the speed limit and there are 10 of your "friends" that were driving 10mph over the limit. And those 10 people were granted immunity by testifying that you were speeding... even though you were never caught on radar and they were. Then because they said you were speeding you weren't allowed to drive even though your infraction was minimal and routinely practiced by the majority of other participants. And finally your license was revoked as a result. *That *is that kind of singling out that makes this whole investigation unfair.

Nobody is ever going to totally agree. I just think they are doing more damage to the sport of cycling and now triathlons by going through with this witch hunt (even if the witch is real). I was looking forward to seeing Lance compete again.

On a side note, man you can really type.


----------



## PoisonDartFrog (Jul 8, 2010)

I am far FAR from an expert in any of this doping stuff, but if I understand all I have read correctly, then the reason there are thresholds to the test is that in most if not all cases, these are substances that the human body produces naturally in certain quantities. So having "higher than normal" levels of these substances in the blood is therefore evidence of adding these substances artificially. Without a threshold, the tests would detect the naturally occurring quantities.

The other thing to consider is that use or possession of banned doping substances is prohibited as well - having tested levels below the specified limit is just one requirement. So if he did use these banned substances, even a little, he is/was in violation.


----------



## AZ (Apr 14, 2009)

PoisonDartFrog said:


> I am far FAR from an expert in any of this doping stuff, but if I understand all I have read correctly, then the reason there are thresholds to the test is that in most if not all cases, these are substances that the human body produces naturally in certain quantities. So having "higher than normal" levels of these substances in the blood is therefore evidence of adding these substances artificially. Without a threshold, the tests would detect the naturally occurring quantities.
> 
> The other thing to consider is that use or possession of banned doping substances is prohibited as well - having tested levels below the specified limit is just one requirement. So if he did use these banned substances, even a little, he is/was in violation.


/\ This, case in point would be Contador and the levels of Clenbutorol detected. We know how that ended. Lance is not the first and surely won't be the last.


----------



## The Prodigal Son (Apr 22, 2008)

treilley said:


> So what about those thresholds. Why have a threshold? If your test results are under the threshold, are you cheating?
> 
> If he didn't test positive, and he was injecting(any amount), then the tests are flawed.
> 
> ...


Any amount of some drugs in your system is a violation. That is why Doctor Ferrari was one of the best in the world at using masking drugs.

What Lance is like has a lot to do with his credibility as a witness. When Johan or someone else on the inside starts talking, they are likely to speak about threats made to others to keep their mouth shut. Also, if many or most other teams were cheating to try to keep up, you might have a difficult time switching teams if it is known you snitched on Lance.

Are you calling George Hincapie a liar? Why? Will all witnesses be liars in your eyes? Why?



> One of the cyclists who agreed to be interviewed by federal investigators after receiving a subpoena was George Hincapie, Mr. Armstrong's longtime lieutenant who raced alongside him in all of his Tour de France victories. Mr. Hincapie, who announced his retirement from cycling earlier this week, has never tested positive for doping and has never spoken publicly about whether banned substances were used on Mr. Armstrong's team.


Lance Armstrong's Ex-Teammates Cooperated in Doping Case - WSJ.com


----------



## The Prodigal Son (Apr 22, 2008)

bee said:


> Dear Internet Scholar,
> While it is much appreciated that your dissertations are the length of a high school essay, could you please keep your thoughts to a few sentences? Thanks.
> 
> Sincerely,
> Rider with an extremely high IQ, but extremely low attention span


So, when viewing the articles regarding the details of the investigation, you can't be bothered to read them. It's easier to form an opinion on Lance's guilt based on how much you enjoyed watching him beat Europeans? Makes sense and speaks to your actual I.Q.


----------



## Lenny7 (Sep 1, 2008)

The Prodigal Son said:


> That's all you have to comment on? Are you kiding me? Are you a lawyer or something? Marion married CJ. She dumped him when he got busted. She met Tim Montgomery and had a son with him. He doped and became world champ at 100 meters. She and Tim got busted. She said only Tim was using the drugs despite her checks that were found at BALCO.
> 
> Now, did I have any grammar errors or did I miss something major like her sons name or the type of toothpaste she uses? Stay focused. This is about Lance cheating and what patterns a cheater often follows.


Yeah, that's all I got, I don't read 10 paragraph forum posts by keyboard warriors. As I scanned over it rather quickly, that grabbed my eye. Oh, one other thing, you should calm down... it's a online forum, it has nothing do to with life. :thumbsup:


----------



## edoz (Jan 16, 2004)

As pointed out to me by someone else:
Just vacate the seven years. 

1999
1. Lance Armstrong
2. Alex Zülle (‘98 busted for EPO)
3. Fernando Escartín (Festina team doping exposed in ‘04; he was never busted)
4. Laurent Dufaux (‘98 busted for EPO)
5. Ángel Casero (‘06 implicated in Operacion Puerto)


2000
1. Lance Armstrong
2. Jan Ullrich (‘06 implicated in Operacion Puerto)
3. Joseba Beloki (‘06 implicated in Operacion Puerto)
4. Christophe Moraue (‘98 busted for EPO)
5. Roberto Heras (‘05 busted for EPO)


2001
1. Lance Armstrong
2. Jan Ullrich (‘06 implicated in Operacion Puerto)
3. Joseba Beloki (‘06 implicated in Operacion Puerto)
4. Andrei Kivilev (dead)
5. Igor González de Galdeano (‘06 implicated in Operacion Puerto)


2002
1. Lance Armstrong
2. Joseba Beloki (‘06 implicated in Operacion Puerto)
3. Raimondas Rumšas (Suspended in ‘03 for doping)
4. Santiago Botero (‘06 implicated in Operacion Puerto)
5. Igor González de Galdeano (‘06 implicated in Operacion Puerto)


2003
1. Lance Armstrong
2. Jan Ullrich (‘06 implicated in Operacion Puerto)
3. Alexander Vinokourov (Suspended in ‘07 for CERA)
4. Tyler Hamilton (Suspended ‘04 for blood doping)
5. Haimar Zubeldia (wait ... WE HAVE A WINNER)


2004
1. Lance Armstrong
2. Andreas Kloden (Named in doping case in ‘08)
3. Ivan Basso (Suspended in ‘07 for Operacion Puerto ties)
4. Jan Ullrich (‘06 implicated in Operacion Puerto)
5. Jose Azevedo (‘06 implicated in Operacion Puerto)


2005
1. Lance Armstrong
2. Ivan Basso (Suspended in ‘07 for Operacion Puerto ties)
3. Jan Ullrich (‘06 implicated in Operacion Puerto)
4. Fransico Mancebo (‘06 implicated in Operacion Puerto)
5. Alexander Vinokourov (Suspended in ‘07 for CERA)

I think you need to dig pretty deep to find a clean racer.


----------



## Lenny7 (Sep 1, 2008)

edoz said:


> As pointed out to me by someone else:
> Just vacate the seven years.
> 
> 1999
> ...


No you don't, look at the first place winner in all of those.


----------



## modifier (May 11, 2007)

big terry said:


> tldr.


All you had to do was read down to the point where he says that the feds don't spend much money on enforcing illegal drug laws. No reason to read anything else.


----------



## likeaboss (Jan 1, 2012)

The Prodigal Son said:


> Any amount of some drugs in your system is a violation. That is why Doctor Ferrari was one of the best in the world at using masking drugs.
> 
> What Lance is like has a lot to do with his credibility as a witness. When Johan or someone else on the inside starts talking, they are likely to speak about threats made to others to keep their mouth shut. Also, if many or most other teams were cheating to try to keep up, you might have a difficult time switching teams if it is known you snitched on Lance.
> 
> ...


If any amount is a violation and he did just a little bit, why wasn't he prosecuted then? If they could mask it then the tests are flawed. Period. Why bother testing?

Really? So you think there are no teams out there that thought Lance was cheating that might pay to get one of his teammates to eliminate him from the tour? Maybe guys getting ready to retire.

I never said GH was a liar and I never said that they all lie. Do not put words in my mouth. You need to read more carefully.

Agreed to testify after being served. Of course he agreed. That is the legal obligation of a Subpena. I would not be surprised if that is just media propaganda to make it sound like GH will testify against him. Nowhere does it indicate that he will. If he does, then he is also tarnishing his otherwise clean career record. You cannot expect him to say he knew about it but did not participate. Why aren't Tyler and Floyd testifying against George? They are claiming it was a team effort.

I am trying to stay open-minded about this case. All we have to inform us is the media which I do not trust anyway. We will just have to see where this ends up. No point in arguing points based on media misinformation and sensationalism.

Time to ride.


----------



## 53119 (Nov 7, 2008)

i used to love pro road racing when steel frames were still winning tours, roubaix, flanders, and lbl but i was alot younger and romanticized the crap out of it because the backdrops and settings were just epic. Obviously, I was quite naive and brushed off any articles in my Winning magazines about alleged doping practices but when Pantani died it hit me then for some reason that a sport i was passionate about had been quite ugly for its players.

I've never been a Lance fan (and I took serious crap for that when you're hangin in Austin and in the bike industry) but not for any alledged doping crap. It was just that he simply wasn't of interest.
Sadly, I don't think going after him will have any effect on a sickness that's incurable. What gets me now is that there are some amazingly talented young groms that always come up only to end up feeling they have to choose this sickness in order to participate. 

I'm f'n rambling. sorry. Hope they sort it out and everybody gets what they want out of it. whatever "it" may be. It's just a tired-ass story of the same old shite. Plenty of other great U.S. riders to give props to...overend, tomac, lopes, furtado, hell even napalm and the missle and their partying ways I'll take over lance's drawn out crap. it was more entertaining to see him throw his game at an olsen twin..


----------



## The Prodigal Son (Apr 22, 2008)

modifier said:


> All you had to do was read down to the point where he says that the feds don't spend much money on enforcing illegal drug laws. No reason to read anything else.


But I didn't say that, did I? Think of the spending as a penney for every billion dollars the federal government is spending each day. Your own state senator and your own congressional rep. that you keep voting into office are stealing vast sums from you and you will keep voting for them. This story about Lance is hardly about the cost of the investigation. That is a distraction people are throwing up to avoid debating facts of the case.


----------



## AZ (Apr 14, 2009)

The Prodigal Son said:


> But I didn't say that, did I? Think of the spending as a penney for every billion dollars the federal government is spending each day. Your own state senator and your own congressional rep. that you keep voting into office are stealing vast sums from you and you will keep voting for them. This story about Lance is hardly about the cost of the investigation. That is a distraction people are throwing up to avoid debating facts of the case.


Leave the politics out of the conversation thank you.


----------



## ConomaBike (Apr 27, 2012)

Hi everybody.

This is my very first post in this forum and I'm really sad it has to be about this topic (that has already been beaten to dead).

Edoz, really like that recap of how many top level cheaters Lance defeated in his time. 

So this is what we know from FACTS:

1. He has never proven positive. PERIOD.

2. He retires, comes back three years later without full team support and finishes the Tour in third place (oh wait, or it was second because Contador has actually been caught!). A month later he finishes Leadville 30 minutes faster than second place with a flat tire. Again, Lance has never tested positive.

3. Now, at 40 he comes back to his original sport, triathlon. In his very first 70.3 he finished second, another third place and has won two races and in the worst of conditions he beat the course record in Hawaii. Let's be reminded that he's never tested positive not then not now.

What else needs to be said? Do we need more proof that this is an exceptional human being? And yet...

4. His accusers are proven dopers/liars.

5. The french press, the federal government, his former competitors. All of them would love to see him fall yet after all these years all they can put together is some "eye-witness testimony". Where are the syringes, left overs, bags, bills, payments to doctors? He's been charged with "conspiracy" when the only conspiracy I see is to bring him down.

6. The TIMING! All this is happening three weeks before the Nice Ironman and the Tour (I imagine all the sponsors nervous about Johan Bruineel and the fate of RadioShackNissanTrek. 

How convenient... 

How much damage they want to cause in his career and all he's been fighting for and has contributed to? This is not about the truth or making justice. This is about causing the most pain and damage. It won't matter when this is over who wins... 

Well too much for a first post...

If Lance is guilty of doping I full support to strip of his victories and he must be banned from anything until the end of times. But please usada, make a case based of facts and not testimonies.


----------



## The Prodigal Son (Apr 22, 2008)

treilley said:


> If any amount is a violation and he did just a little bit, why wasn't he prosecuted then? If they could mask it then the tests are flawed. Period. Why bother testing?
> 
> Really? So you think there are no teams out there that thought Lance was cheating that might pay to get one of his teammates to eliminate him from the tour? Maybe guys getting ready to retire.
> 
> ...


Tests are created to find illegal drug use by cyclists. Some get caught. others have chemists and doctors who learn from the new tests and create a new drug or a drug to mask the current drug. If there is a new test that detects the masking drugs, the riders can be at risk and need to move ahead of the testers, and find new ways to avoid getting caught. Lance employed the best doctor for cheating the systems as they tried to catch up to the cheats. The test were not flawed. They were outsmarted, like a radar detector helps speeding drivers.

George Hincape has handled this wisely. He has seen fellow teammates smeared and called liars and losers. He wants to avoid the same. He is also still riding and any admissions will be used to ban him. If he retires this year, and if he needs the cash, he can write a book telling people details of the cheating done by riders of U.S. Postal. He will be called a liar and someone wanting to sell his book, even if every word is true.

I agree with you that other teams were probably hoping to expose Lance. Actually, many did say he was cheating. They needed more than that and could not come up with indisputable evidence, or testimony from any teammates. If you want to switch teams during your career, you probably won't get any offers if you are someone who has testified about your teammates doping. Despite the difficulty investigating pro cycling, just look how many were caught. It's not entirely impossible to prove guilt.

I keep repeating this but innocent people don't surround themselves with guilty people throughout their entire career. That's the pattern people ignore, for some reason.


----------



## roadie scum (Jan 21, 2011)

ConomaBike said:


> Hi everybody.
> 
> So this is what we know from FACTS:
> 
> ...


USATODAY.com - Story: Armstrong had six positives from 1999 tests


----------



## big terry (Apr 22, 2012)

roadie scum said:


> USATODAY.com - Story: Armstrong had six positives from 1999 tests


from that article:

"The paper even admits in its own article that the science in question here is faulty and that I have no way to defend myself," Armstrong said in a statement released late Monday night. "They state: 'There will therefore be no counter-exam nor regulatory prosecutions, in a strict sense, since defendant's rights cannot be respected.' I will simply restate what I have said many times: I have never taken performance-enhancing drugs."

and this gem:

What separates the most-recent charges is the journalistic credibility of L'Equipe, owned by the Amaury Sports Organisation, which also owns the Tour de France. Both businesses are housed in the same Paris office complex.

ahhh yes, witch hunt much?

they are missing the biggest point of all about how armstrong wins so handily over everyone else- HE HAS NO NADS. its just not PC to call it like it is, so they have to call him out on the same thing everyone else is doing. theyre just mad he does it better.

this is great, these lance threads are almost as fun as the jeep bike thread. and about as relevant.


----------



## The Prodigal Son (Apr 22, 2008)

ConomaBike;9412174
So this is what we know from FACTS:
1. He has never proven positive. PERIOD.
Not a fact. PERIOD
4. His accusers are proven dopers/liars.
USADA are dopers and liars? Not a fact.
5. The french press said:


> When people say things like; the fact of the matter is...you know they are not actually discussing the facts of the matter.


----------



## ConomaBike (Apr 27, 2012)

"The paper even admits in its own article that the science in question here is faulty..."


----------



## PoisonDartFrog (Jul 8, 2010)

I think we should all base our opinion on his innocence or guilt solely on whether we like him or not. Oh wait, never mind


----------



## The Prodigal Son (Apr 22, 2008)

big terry said:


> from that article:
> 
> "The paper even admits in its own article that the science in question here is faulty and that I have no way to defend myself," Armstrong said in a statement released late Monday night. "They state: 'There will therefore be no counter-exam nor regulatory prosecutions, in a strict sense, since defendant's rights cannot be respected.' I will simply restate what I have said many times: I have never taken performance-enhancing drugs."
> 
> ...


It sounds like you agree Lance cheated all those years. He just cheated better and didn't get busted, which many here respect and admire.

But there are still a few who actually believe he was clean. I mean. that is what Lance is saying. He could just say he didn't do anything that everyone else wasn't doing. But he thumbs his nose and dares people to catch him cheating. When you do that, you invite this treatment.

If you were the best pro cyclist and you rode clean and wanted it known you rode clean, what would you do? Would you join a team of cheaters and liars? Would you make plane trips to France to meet secretly with Doctor Ferrari? Would you hire Doctor Ferrari after his involvement with doping riders? Would you tell women you dated that you cheated? Would you protect yourself and avoid all of the above, if you were riding clean?


----------



## ConomaBike (Apr 27, 2012)

Has not Landis accused Lance of doping? Isn't Floyd Landis a doper/liar?

If I say "I imagine" what do you think it means?

The Timing: Yes it is my opinion that they are doing this at a very precise point in time to cause damage. In october it would not have caused the same impact in Lance, Johan and the cycling world. And this is a fact.

If I say "the feds, the french and competitors LOVE to see him down" then I am stating a fact. Because I said "would love" then I am not stating a fact, it is my opinion.

Nevertheless I admit that I should have explicitly indicate the difference between the facts and my opinions for people with a diminished understanding of the english language.

Too bad I chose this topic for my first five posts before I can post my own... and very likely I might get banned from posting in this forum again...


----------



## AZ (Apr 14, 2009)

ConomaBike said:


> Has not Landis accused Lance of doping? Isn't Floyd Landis a doper/liar?
> 
> If I say "I imagine" what do you think it means?
> 
> ...


Did you ever consider that it takes a doper to catch a doper? Just sayin.


----------



## Trail Addict (Nov 20, 2011)

The French are throwing such a big tantrum about this.

In reality the French despise Americans with a passion, they always have. They're just butt hurt because an American has put their country to shame 7 times in a row.

Besides the majority of the other racers use drugs as well. That's a fact.


----------



## ConomaBike (Apr 27, 2012)

AZ.MTNS,

So to catch thieves, drug dealers, rapists, murderers you have to be one of them? Just saying... ;-)

I do believe that to catch cheaters in sports you need a lot more than testimonies (specially when they are not that reputable) to prove somebody guilty beyond reasonable doubt.


----------



## H0WL (Jan 17, 2007)

The Prodigal Son said:


> *Would you tell women you dated that you cheated?*


Prodigal, I'm curious. Do you have a reference for this? Wondered if any of his ex whatevers would come forth with comments.


----------



## AZ (Apr 14, 2009)

ConomaBike said:


> AZ.MTNS,
> 
> So to catch thieves, drug dealers, rapists, murderers you have to be one of them? Just saying... ;-)
> 
> I do believe that to catch cheaters in sports you need a lot more than testimonies (specially when they are not that reputable) to prove somebody guilty beyond reasonable doubt.


Witness testimony is enough to convict someone of murder, why should it not be enough in this case? And yes, drug dealers are commonly used to catch drug dealers, you use every resource available to you as long as it falls within the guidelines of the law.


----------



## bee (Apr 7, 2008)

The Prodigal Son said:


> So, when viewing the articles regarding the details of the investigation, you can't be bothered to read them. It's easier to form an opinion on Lance's guilt based on how much you enjoyed watching him beat Europeans? Makes sense and speaks to your actual I.Q.


Dude! I was only kidding about you writing a novel-sized message of a post back on page 4 of this thread. Actually, ummm... They were kinda long-winded posts. You have some good thoughts, but who's going to read all that stuff? I mean, how about summarizing and leave the longer articles to the blogs and reporters?

PS - I don't know where you got that I am a huge Armstrong fan. I am not. True, I use to be. I mean, he beat cancer. However, I see him now for the cheat that he is. There's just way too many people saying that he did it for all of them to be lieing like Armstrong is trying to make people believe.


----------



## bee (Apr 7, 2008)

edoz said:


> As pointed out to me by someone else:
> Just vacate the seven years.
> 
> 1999
> ...


Wait a minute! Before we just award the Tour de France titles to someone else, let's make sure Armstrong is guilty. He deserves his day in court, and if guilty then he needs to be condemned, tarred, and feathered, and never be allowed to enter into any sporting competition ever.

Then, we talk about who to award the titles too. I say, just give them to the next guy down the list. And only when he is tarred and feathered due to the mountain of evidence that Armstrong is facing, do we continue to go down the list. However, let's not place the cart before the horse. Armstrong needs to be strung up and stoned first.


----------



## Boyonabyke (Sep 5, 2007)

PoisonDartFrog said:


> I am far FAR from an expert in any of this doping stuff, but if I understand all I have read correctly, then the reason there are thresholds to the test is that in most if not all cases, these are substances that the human body produces naturally in certain quantities. So having "higher than normal" levels of these substances in the blood is therefore evidence of adding these substances artificially. Without a threshold, the tests would detect the naturally occurring quantities.
> 
> The other thing to consider is that use or possession of banned doping substances is prohibited as well - having tested levels below the specified limit is just one requirement. So if he did use these banned substances, even a little, he is/was in violation.


Bingo! And as The Prodigal Son pointed out, as a professionsal, you don't surround your self with people that have been busted with using dope. Birds of a Feather, Flock Together. At some point, one has to be true to themselves and admit what they've done was wrong. Or have a judge tell them, if they are stubborn or in denial.

I've been in trophy fishing circles, money changes everything.... and those at the top, for the most part, in bass tournaments, all of them are dirty, some of them get caught, most don't, they stay a half a step ahead of the enforcers. Lance may have lost his half step advantage at this point in time.


----------



## 53119 (Nov 7, 2008)

who do you guys pick to play him on the big movie screen biopic when this is all done?


----------



## Lenny7 (Sep 1, 2008)

Prodigal Son, are you Alberto Contador?


----------



## 53119 (Nov 7, 2008)

i read contador recently injured schleck's hip?


----------



## H0WL (Jan 17, 2007)

Wonder where Chris Carmichael is in all of this? He rode the Armstrong train to a pretty good life, or maybe he was an engineer driving the train early on.


----------



## Trail Addict (Nov 20, 2011)

I love how everyone against lance here are so ignorant to realize that the majority of TDF racers use drugs.


----------



## BruceBrown (Jan 16, 2004)

Was LeMond clean.....?






Really? Was he?


----------



## Stugotz (Dec 14, 2011)

BruceBrown said:


> Was LeMond clean.....?
> 
> Really? Was he?


Well, Armstrongs $200,000.00 reward for one of Greg's ex-teammates (or any other pro cyclist for that matter) to come forward and go on record as having seen Greg dope was not enough incentive, so I'd say no.

I'm staying out at his place at the Yellowstone Club up in Big Sky, MT next week and I can rifle the premises looking for blood bags or syringes etc if you are really interested in trying to find some proof...


----------



## BruceBrown (Jan 16, 2004)

Stugotz said:


> Well, Armstrongs $200,000.00 reward for one of Greg's ex-teammates (or any other pro cyclist for that matter) to come forward and go on record as having seen Greg dope was not enough incentive, so I'd say no.
> 
> I'm staying out at his place at the Yellowstone Club up in Big Sky, MT next week and I can rifle the premises looking for blood bags or syringes etc if you are really interested in trying to find some proof...


I think his post 1990 performance qualified the end of any enhanced help.


----------



## Stugotz (Dec 14, 2011)

BruceBrown said:


> I think his post 1990 performance qualified the end of any enhanced help.


And you have proof of Greg's Doping prior to 1990 then. Care to share it with the rest of us?


----------



## Haggis (Jan 21, 2004)

Trail Addict said:


> I love how everyone against lance here are so ignorant to realize that the majority of TDF racers use drugs.


----------



## AZ (Apr 14, 2009)

Trail Addict said:


> I love how everyone against lance here are so ignorant to realize that the majority of TDF racers use drugs.


Doesn't make it right. That is the litmus test, how many people will do what is right even when everyone else is not. A true person of character and honor will do the right thing. My two cents.


----------



## Berkeley Mike (Jan 13, 2004)

Who was right and what did they know and when?

Don't care.

Jillions, no, Cajillions of dollars to go after Barry Bonds. What a waste.


----------



## roadie scum (Jan 21, 2011)

Berkeley Mike said:


> Who was right and what did they know and when?
> 
> Don't care.
> 
> Jillions, no, Cajillions of dollars to go after Barry Bonds. What a waste.


Don't care about what is right? That speaks volumes.


----------



## BruceBrown (Jan 16, 2004)

Stugotz said:


> And you have proof of Greg's Doping prior to 1990 then. Care to share it with the rest of us?


Isn't that the circular point? All this "proof" that Lance was not clean. And LeMond trouncing certain riders that later admitted "enhancements" that they were using.

So the question is raised - just how long has it been going on within the sport?

Hmmmmm......a long, long, long, time...list of doping cases in cycling.


----------



## 1niceride (Jan 30, 2004)

To be top dog in most any sport one must push the limits of the rules and a little over it. Same in business as witnessed by resistance to real laws in banking to keep it honest. Sports is not honest nor is the business world. They are both the same. Money talks. 

Look at basketball. One fouls another, which is against the rules hence the penalty. You foul the guy who sucks at foul shots. Is that honorable? If it wins the game all is good. Lance won the game..Too bad.


----------



## AZ (Apr 14, 2009)

1niceride said:


> Lance won the game..Too bad.


The game is being reviewed.


----------



## smoothsam (Mar 27, 2011)

karma


----------



## MTBCanuck (May 19, 2011)

I feel it is self riteous of the sport to make an example of lance even if he was doping. The man has done more for cancer reaserch than another single individual, largely beacause of of his cycling excellence. If you also consider that most if not all of his competetors were doping as well it's hard not to see that as a srandard and hence irrelevant from a competition standpooint. The man's effprts towrad cancer research far and away overshadow the importance of the race wins. I'm not saying the sport shouldn't be watching all racers a lot more closely from now on but for people as relevant as Lance, I say let bygones be bygones.


----------



## iamunchien (Mar 30, 2008)

if you're not directly involved in the case with all documentation available to you, everything you say is speculation.

and no media outlet ever investigates nor do they provide a complete detaildc picture of what is going on.

so I say sit back and let the experts sort it out.

of course, it might be all politics and corruption. so either way, we're screwed.

meow.


----------



## bee (Apr 7, 2008)

I went on the internet and found that the Lance Armstrong Fan Club does not care whether or not there are dopers in the sport of cycling. They say that they have proof that every single participant in the sport of cycling, both at the amateur level and professional level is on EPO. So, according to them Armstrong won fair and square.

This was just released from the president of the Lance Armstrong Fan Club, "Lance Armstrong is not a proponent of drug-free sports, and neither are we."


----------



## The Prodigal Son (Apr 22, 2008)

How does this discussion change if Lance makes a confession and asks us to forgive him?

It seems the vast majority of people participating in this discussion believe he cheated, but that so did most of his competition. At this point, the only people saying Lance rode clean are Lance and his attorney. 

Lance wants it all. He wants the wealth and celebrity of winning the Tour, but he wants people to think only riders finishing below him cheated. Lately, he reminds me of Bruce Jenner. As a fan of track & field, I loved watching him win the gold in the decathlon. But then, like Lance, he dumped his beautiful and supporting wife to live the life of a celebrity. They both wanted to attend hollywood parties and even get into the movies. They wanted to date famous women. Bruce even went through a series of plastic surgeries, which make him look a bit gruesome. 

I don't know any details of Lance's marriage. He may have been a good husband and a solid father. I didn't read accounts written by his various girlfriends after he was divorced. I understand they are not flattering. That doesn't always mean a lot. 

It just keeps coming back to saying everyone cheated but me. I rode clean. It would be so much easier to swallow if he said everyone cheated, what was I to do? What would you do if you knew you could beat them if they rode clean, but they all refused? If Lance retires from competition and states clearly that he wanted to ride clean and did so for a year, and then he was told he was talented enough to win the Tour if he doped just enough to keep up with other top riders who dope. And then he can be judged by all and he can ask us to forgive him. We all probably would see him as a better man for clearing the air and being magnanimous.


----------



## Procter (Feb 3, 2012)

Anyone who believes that drug tests are effective should read Game of Shadows and read up on how testing works. The tests are done using mass spectroscopy, a technique that can find exact known chemical compounds only. For example, a particular synthetic testosterone like deca durabilon or sustanon has some known molecular formula, say C28 H44 O3, but is treated like real testosterone by the body (almost, that's where side effects and liver damage come in). Through mass spectroscopy, they can detect this exact compound once they know to look for it. If they look for any random combination, they will get many false positives and inconclusive results because there are so many compounds in the body its a million needles in a haystack - you don't know which one is the doping agent. 

But, other synthetic testosterone compounds, say with a few more or less C, H, O, can be developed in ever cheaper labs with todays technology, and are not detectable until either someone sends a sample to the ADA, someone gets caught with a new substance or reveals it as part of a plea bargain. This its how Bonds escaped detection for so long: it was not until a sample was sent to the mlb anonymously and Balco was busted. So, the dopers will easily stay years ahead off the labs, and we are entering an era where 5 year old blood samples will routinely test positive for substances that were not known at the time. Epo testing suffers the same challenge. Masking agents convolute the testing more. It was only recently that any HGH test was accepted by the testing industry, and, hgh dissapates so quickly (i think a couple days) it is extremely easy to use for training and get away with.

During years of his life, when, statistically, pro athletes in any endurance and strength sport experience a dramatically declining performance (32-34), Lance was still beating the best in the world. Did he dope? We will surely all see the ADA's evidence and judge for ourselves, and I agree innocent until proven guilty, but I encourage folks to do a little research on the fallacies of drug testing before they tout this a proof of innocence.


----------



## Lenny7 (Sep 1, 2008)

The Prodigal Son said:


> he dumped his beautiful and supporting wife to live the life of a celebrity. They both wanted to attend hollywood parties and even get into the movies. They wanted to date famous women. Bruce even went through a series of plastic surgeries, which make him look a bit gruesome.


Do you have a subscriptions to People and OK magazine? What are the Kardashians up to this week? Did you see the cover of Teen Beat this week? OMG! 

Pretending to know peoples personal lives and why they got divorced is well, on par with a lot of the others stuff you've said so far. Wouldn't it be cool if Armstrong had a MTBR account and you could leave him neg rep for leaving his wife?


----------



## Guapo (Jun 16, 2012)

Good thread.

To his critics, I think Lance sums it up best in his own words, 

"I have never doped, and, unlike many of my accusers, I have competed as an endurance athlete for 25 years with no spike in performance, passed more than 500 drug tests and never failed one," Armstrong said in a statement. "Any fair consideration of these allegations has and will continue to vindicate me."


----------



## 1362 (Sep 12, 2010)

Same line...could care less if some sports yahoooo took some juice, drank shark piss or whatever to gain edge. It is just games. Barry bonds, clemens, lance, it is all over, in the past, history. Focus on the future, like how he never tested positive, then fix it and move on. Geesh, are people wanting to take Babe Ruth to court along with others who used suspected cures back then. Why people feel need to waste tons of money going after them vs more real important stuff to fix economy via providing training and creating jobs is something I do not understand. 
I do want to clarify that Lances charity does not even contribute to research anymore, so some of you get of that wagon.


----------



## bee (Apr 7, 2008)

Guapo is a fake. It is his 1st post. He is likely a minion of the Lance Armstrong club, or possibly some friend of the Yellow Rubber Band for-profit organization. Either way, he has like a bunch of other user names on other forums to carry out the dissemination of Armstrong propaganda.

Let's focus on what we know. Lance Armstrong is a vengeful person with a vendetta against Frankie Andreu's wife, Betsy. He is a guy who has stolen millions of taxpayer dollars when he was riding for US Postal and employing EPO doctors to give him and the team performance-enhancing drugs. He is a bitter washed up trigeek, who was able to get the best drugs and most drugs, and was able to win a race a year 7 times. He got the UCI to look the other way on multiple positive tests directly after paying them off, yep, hundreds of thousands of dollars. He doesn't like private conversations unless they are in a car. He uses Cancer research as his front to defraud the public of many millions more. Bottom line: guy is a scumbag.


----------



## Sean K (Mar 25, 2012)

bee said:


> Guapo is a fake. It is his 1st post. He is likely a minion of the Lance Armstrong club, or possibly some friend of the Yellow Rubber Band for-profit organization. Either way, he has like a bunch of other user names on other forums to carry out the dissemination of Armstrong propaganda.
> 
> Let's focus on what we know. Lance Armstrong is a vengeful person with a vendetta against Frankie Andreu's wife, Betsy. He is a guy who has stolen millions of taxpayer dollars when he was riding for US Postal and employing EPO doctors to give him and the team performance-enhancing drugs. He is a bitter washed up trigeek, who was able to get the best drugs and most drugs, and was able to win a race a year 7 times. He got the UCI to look the other way on multiple positive tests directly after paying them off, yep, hundreds of thousands of dollars. He doesn't like private conversations unless they are in a car. He uses Cancer research as his front to defraud the public of many millions more. Bottom line: guy is a scumbag.


But he'd still whoop your butt on a bike...


----------



## Blurr (Dec 7, 2009)

RandyBoy said:


> Bingo! And as The Prodigal Son pointed out, as a professionsal, you don't surround your self with people that have been busted with using dope. Birds of a Feather, Flock Together. At some point, one has to be true to themselves and admit what they've done was wrong. Or have a judge tell them, if they are stubborn or in denial.
> 
> I've been in trophy fishing circles, money changes everything.... and those at the top, for the most part, in bass tournaments, all of them are dirty, some of them get caught, most don't, they stay a half a step ahead of the enforcers. Lance may have lost his half step advantage at this point in time.


How do you cheat at the top fishing?


----------



## Blurr (Dec 7, 2009)

AZ.MTNS said:


> Witness testimony is enough to convict someone of murder, why should it not be enough in this case? And yes, drug dealers are commonly used to catch drug dealers, you use every resource available to you as long as it falls within the guidelines of the law.


No Eye witness testimony is not enough to convict anyone of Murder in this day and age, it can be used however to support other evidence, such as a bloody knife, fingerprints ect ect.

The Innocence Project - Understand the Causes: Eyewitness Misidentification

"Eyewitness misidentification is the single greatest cause of wrongful convictions nationwide, playing a role in more than 75% of convictions overturned through DNA testing."

The one fact is this, regardless if Lance Doped or not, he did to cycling what Woods did to golf, put it on the map and bring more people into the sport.

does that make it right? No, but then again he is not actually guilty until proven so.


----------



## Stugotz (Dec 14, 2011)

bee said:


> Let's focus on what we know. Lance Armstrong is a vengeful person with a vendetta against Frankie Andreu's wife, Betsy. He is a guy who has stolen millions of taxpayer dollars when he was riding for US Postal and employing EPO doctors to give him and the team performance-enhancing drugs. He is a bitter washed up trigeek, who was able to get the best drugs and most drugs, and was able to win a race a year 7 times. He got the UCI to look the other way on multiple positive tests directly after paying them off, yep, hundreds of thousands of dollars. He doesn't like private conversations unless they are in a car. He uses Cancer research as his front to defraud the public of many millions more. Bottom line: guy is a scumbag.


Italian investigators reported as tracing $465,000 payment from Armstrong to Ferrari in 2006


----------



## 1niceride (Jan 30, 2004)

I thought Lance was down to one nut because of cancer. Doesn't Lance need to take supplement testosterone? Maybe this was brought out before..


----------



## Blurr (Dec 7, 2009)

1niceride said:


> I thought Lance was down to one nut because of cancer. Doesn't Lance need to take supplement testosterone? Maybe this was brought out before..


Excellent point , dont worry, the village stil wants him to burn!!


----------



## Rivet (Sep 3, 2004)

big terry said:


> and this gem:
> 
> What separates the most-recent charges is the journalistic credibility of L'Equipe, owned by the Amaury Sports Organisation, which also owns the Tour de France. Both businesses are housed in the same Paris office complex.
> 
> .


What that fails to mention is that L'Equipe also broke the ORIGINAL doping story in 1998, the Festina (french) team was taken down for systematic doping (EPO) virtually crushing French cycling and competitiveness for over a decade.


----------



## Guapo (Jun 16, 2012)

bee said:


> Guapo is a fake. It is his 1st post. He is likely a minion of the Lance Armstrong club, or possibly some friend of the Yellow Rubber Band for-profit organization. Either way, he has like a bunch of other user names on other forums to carry out the dissemination of Armstrong propaganda.
> 
> Let's focus on what we know. Lance Armstrong is a vengeful person with a vendetta against Frankie Andreu's wife, Betsy. He is a guy who has stolen millions of taxpayer dollars when he was riding for US Postal and employing EPO doctors to give him and the team performance-enhancing drugs. He is a bitter washed up trigeek, who was able to get the best drugs and most drugs, and was able to win a race a year 7 times. He got the UCI to look the other way on multiple positive tests directly after paying them off, yep, hundreds of thousands of dollars. He doesn't like private conversations unless they are in a car. He uses Cancer research as his front to defraud the public of many millions more. Bottom line: guy is a scumbag.


bee, this 6-3-2012 headline must really burn you:
Lance Armstrong, the seven-time Tour de France cycling champion, claimed his second Half Ironman triathlon title in two weeks by breaking the course record on the Kohala Coast in Hawaii by six minutes.

Thanks for the nice welcome to the forums though. I guess 'peace, love, happiness' only applies to everything non-Lance Armstrong. As a fellow 40 yr old roadie, I think Lance can seriously bring it. He'd kick all our butts on anything with two wheels.


----------



## Blurr (Dec 7, 2009)

Guapo said:


> bee, this 6-3-2012 headline must really burn you:
> Lance Armstrong, the seven-time Tour de France cycling champion, claimed his second Half Ironman triathlon title in two weeks by breaking the course record on the Kohala Coast in Hawaii by six minutes.
> 
> Thanks for the nice welcome to the forums though. I guess 'peace, love, happiness' only applies to everything non-Lance Armstrong. As a fellow 40 yr old roadie, I think Lance can seriously bring it. He'd kick all our butts on anything with two wheels.


Lance raced and won the Ledville 100 in 09

Lance Armstrong Wins Leadville Trail 100 | Mountain Bike Blog || SINGLETRACKS.COM

Last year takes the qualifier
Lance Armstrong's Surprise Win in Leadville 100 Qualifier | Bicycling Magazine

After a hard-fought morning and despite riding in third position throughout the second half of the race, Lance Armstrong overcame Krause in the final stretch of singletrack and crossed the finish line first in 4:32:21. Though the win qualifies the seven-time Tour de France champion for the Leadville 100, Armstrong said he was "too old" to compete in that race, and reminded the crowd that he has "retired" from bike racing.


----------



## roadie scum (Jan 21, 2011)

All will be for naught if it is true that he has been doping since high school. Then all the leg humpers will have to swing from someone elses nuts.


----------



## roadie scum (Jan 21, 2011)

And here is a link for you guy's that think links showing Lances wins change anything. Why did Lance pay Dr. Ferrari over 400,000 dollars?

Italian investigators reported as tracing $465,000 payment from Armstrong to Ferrari in 2006


----------



## ImaFred (May 16, 2009)

roadie scum said:


> And here is a link for you guy's that think links showing Lances wins change anything. Why did Lance pay Dr. Ferrari over 400,000 dollars?
> 
> Italian investigators reported as tracing $465,000 payment from Armstrong to Ferrari in 2006


Damn! thats a lot of moolah.........

:skeptic: psssssst
Anyone need anything


----------



## Rivet (Sep 3, 2004)

roadie scum said:


> All will be for naught if it is true that he has been doping since high school.


There has been much speculation about this. I knew an ex-pro tri guy from way back that said there was talk about him using when he was beating up on seniors as a junior in triatlhlons.


----------



## bee (Apr 7, 2008)

Sean K said:


> But he'd still whoop your butt on a bike...


Haha! Lol! Yeah, but I haven't been on steroids for the last 20 years either!


----------



## bee (Apr 7, 2008)

Stugotz said:


> Italian investigators reported as tracing $465,000 payment from Armstrong to Ferrari in 2006


Wow! I guess with that much money he's got all of us dopers beat since Livestrong people are now saying that everybody, including you and me, are doping. So, bike racing is all about who can buy the best and most drugs.

Livestrong was never about drug-free sports. It's all about supporting drugs in and out of sports.


----------



## roadie scum (Jan 21, 2011)

bee said:


> Livestrong was never about drug-free sports. It's all about supporting drugs in and out of sports.


And fuel for the jet.


----------



## 29ernb (Mar 20, 2012)

i don't think lance did any doping. something would have come up in the 500+ tests he took


----------



## Asbury (Oct 26, 2006)

The End


----------



## Guapo (Jun 16, 2012)

roadie scum said:


> And here is a link for you guy's that think links showing Lances wins change anything. Why did Lance pay Dr. Ferrari over 400,000 dollars?


Maybe it was for a trip to the proctologist? He IS 40 after all...


----------



## The Prodigal Son (Apr 22, 2008)

29ernb said:


> i don't think lance did any doping. something would have come up in the 500+ tests he took


Marion Jones passed nearly as many drug tests, yet it turned out she was doping the whole time. You need to understand there are many ways to beat the tests. OK, now that you understand beating the test is not proof of innocence, what do you think about Lance? Was he one of many cheaters? Was he the only person riding clean? Are you totally blind to all the other cheats Lance trained with and traveled with and lived with, and personally hired to be his doctor? If Lance had to be judged by a jury, he'd litterally pay millions to have you be one of the jurors.


----------



## Procter (Feb 3, 2012)

29ernb, this is a common misconception, Game of Shadows is an excellent read about the fallacies of drug testing, it will completely change your confidence in any testing. I tried to capture the essentials in my post a few back.


----------



## LWright (Jan 29, 2006)

zenboy99 said:


> As an analytical chemist who has spent several hours with Floyd Landis and Tyler Hamilton, I can tell you that the issue is Landis and Hamilton revealed HOW Lance was passing all of the tests by microdosing at very distinct levels. Don't forget, his old physiologist Dr. Ferrari helped develop the EPO test. Very convenient.


SO he did everything he could to perform better WITHOUT exceeding the set limits? Hang 'em!!


----------



## ebenke (Sep 1, 2008)

bee said:


> Dear Internet Scholar,
> While it is much appreciated that your dissertations are the length of a high school essay, could you please keep your thoughts to a few sentences? Thanks.
> 
> Sincerely,
> Rider with an extremely high IQ, but extremely low attention span


Thank you.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk (sucks)


----------



## 1362 (Sep 12, 2010)

*dope tests*

So, I would like to know official facts on how many dope tests the guys that admitted doing it failed ? And if they never failed why throw lance under the bus?


----------



## ChewynMe (Apr 29, 2012)

*Smoke doesn't mean fire....*



jeffgothro said:


> I assume thats torwards me, I dont hate, if its true, then thats sad. But if its not, I'm totally behind the guy, I aint a roadie, and I hate road bikes, but I still respect when its earned...I DONT ACTUALLY KNOW IF HE EARNED IT. Its that simple.
> 
> If what I read about him is wrong - cool, and my bad - prove it.


:nono::nono:

Innocent until PROVEN guilty. So we give the benefit of the doubt to those accused instead of giving favor to the accuser. IF he doped, he was just better at it and with it (since they have all been accused). The fact that he passed so many test makes me think they are finding anomalies that occur naturally throughout the body.

I had tests run to keep a watch on my free T4 and T3 and my doc asked me if I had been taking steroids. When I laughed he told me why he asked, my Andro Testosterone was off the chart. Turns out my Thyroid went crazy for a few weeks.

I am not a fan trying to waive a flag of innocence, but point out other possibilities. This is old news so taking his titles is ridiculous but, and I say it BIG TIME, if he used team money to do it, and this can be proven, the feds will have a field day proving just how destructable he is.


----------



## JRS73 (May 26, 2012)

To be honest, I don't give a damn about what happens to Lance.

With that said, I have the following opinions: 

1. If he was micro-doping lower than the threshold for testing, he and his doctors were smart. Technically he was legal. If his former teammates knew how to beat the system, how did they fail?

2. He has been a top notch athlete in multiple sports since the age of 13. It is not all about doping. then again, I'm sure there are plenty of haters out there.

3. One thing that is never factored into the equation is his genetic freak heart. 30% larger than the average human. Pumps more blood/oxygen to the body/muscle per minute, Lactic acid breaks down faster due to the accelerated blood flow, can sustain a freakish heart beat per minute, etc. Even if he doped, he was better than the doping competition. But then again, they doped more then Armstrong...they got caught.

4. I don't give a damn about doping. The doping fills the seats, sells the jerseys/etc., and pushes the bikes and components out the door. If you are straight, GOOD for you!!! If you are cheating, GOOD for you!!!! After all, athletics is a business and you have to do what you need to do.

With all that said, I hate organized athletics. Why? Because it is business and the lowest common denominator is MONEY!!!!!!! Although we all need money, too much will destroy most people.


----------



## Blurr (Dec 7, 2009)

The Prodigal Son said:


> Marion Jones passed nearly as many drug tests, yet it turned out she was doping the whole time. You need to understand there are many ways to beat the tests. OK, now that you understand beating the test is not proof of innocence, what do you think about Lance? Was he one of many cheaters? Was he the only person riding clean? Are you totally blind to all the other cheats Lance trained with and traveled with and lived with, and personally hired to be his doctor? If Lance had to be judged by a jury, he'd litterally pay millions to have you be one of the jurors.


So based on One Athelete who slipped under the gun you will happily pursue a witchhunt with no credible evidence whatsoever. 
How many peoples lives did you ruin based on your Subjective nature and lousy detective skills?


----------



## rydbyk (Oct 13, 2009)

*Guys guys guys...*

Can I suggest that you all head on over to the "doping" forum on Roadbike Review (same company as MTBR)...?

There is NOTHING here in this forum that can be discussed that has not already been discussed for the last 2+ years over there..

UCI
WADA
USADA... all of it... It has already been discussed/argued/re-argued...

It ain't worth it imo...some of you are gonna get in pissin' matches and it isn't necessary.

Just head on over there and become a spectator There are some extremely knowledgeable folks over there that seem to have been following this crap daily for years, almost like an obsession...

It is unfortunate that doping has been part of the sport for over 100 years. This is as clear as 2 + 2 = 4 sorta thing.


----------



## Blurr (Dec 7, 2009)

Lance Is a Mtn biker too. .

And the negative rep some coward left to scared to leave his name on the interweb lol, oh NOOSSS!!! lmfao


> if 10 people are deemed credible and they all say the same thing, then there is validity to it. Take your blinders off


yes they saw him doping because again HE ONLY HAS ONE NUT, HE LEGALLY SHOOTS UP TO A PRESCRIBED AMOUNT!!! 
But I do not consider validity to other cheaters who simply could not perform.

the Law Hates to have facts pointed out for them  OFF TO THE STOCKADES!! 
Civilized Country my ass.


----------



## POG (May 20, 2004)

Have to admire USADA for coming out and admitting that they have failed for FOURTEEN YEARS to do their jobs. Should they be suspended?


----------



## walangkatapat (Jun 2, 2009)

POG said:


> Have to admire USADA for coming out and admitting that they have failed for FOURTEEN YEARS to do their jobs. Should they be suspended?


How about a ban from any actions regarding doping until usada can prove they are competent?


----------



## bee (Apr 7, 2008)

I used to be a big Lance Armstrong fan, but all the allegations slowly have taken its toll. I no longer think that Armstrong is clean. I do believe in cycling and I think Armstrong and a few others are bad apples for cycling. I feel bad for the other guys in the cycling races that aren't cheats like Armstrong.

It really doesn't surprise me all the latest personal attacks from Armstrong against those that provided evidence against him. Armstrong has a very vindictive personality and he's sued just about everybody. So many people have come out and said that he doped and all Armstrong says is they are all trying to get book deals. Armstrong just isn't very believable and I'm not cool with his horrible behavior towards sports and fair play.


----------



## bamwa (Mar 15, 2010)

Guapo said:


> He'd kick all our butts on anything with two wheels.


Sorry buddy, can't you see my avatar? I beat him by two places out at his own ranch.
Mellow Johnny's 6 hr. Men's open class. Just sayin'


----------



## Joel RW (Nov 26, 2011)

Cheese Gromit..... cheese.


----------



## bee (Apr 7, 2008)

MTBCanuck said:


> I feel it is self riteous of the sport to make an example of lance even if he was doping. The man has done more for cancer reaserch than another single individual, largely beacause of of his cycling excellence. If you also consider that most if not all of his competetors were doping as well it's hard not to see that as a srandard and hence irrelevant from a competition standpooint. The man's effprts towrad cancer research far and away overshadow the importance of the race wins. I'm not saying the sport shouldn't be watching all racers a lot more closely from now on but for people as relevant as Lance, I say let bygones be bygones.


Livestrong is a promotional, marketing company. They have admitted that they do not donate to cancer research. Donating to Livestrong, instead of a worthwhile company like the American Association for Cancer Research, is a terrible thing. Livestrong promotes Armstrong more than "cancer awareness" which is their stated cause. They are a huge marketing company not in the business of funding cancer research.


----------



## The Prodigal Son (Apr 22, 2008)

Blurr said:


> So based on One Athelete who slipped under the gun you will happily pursue a witchhunt with no credible evidence whatsoever.
> How many peoples lives did you ruin based on your Subjective nature and lousy detective skills?


You have reached a false conclusion. Based on the history of the most tested female athlete ever, and based on her own admissions, and based in an investigation of BALCO, information gathered from a search warrant issued for BALCO, we know a lot about how professional athletes use PED's and how they pass drug tests despite using PED's. It turns out you can have two professional athletes in the same sport and the difference between one earing $70,000 a year and the other winning over $1,000,000 a year, can be fractions of a second. That is the stoy of Marion Jones and also Tim Montgomery, the father of her child and her boyfriend and her co-conspirator.

It's important, when viewing the landscape of cheating athletes, you look at the other people involved, the coaches or doctors or suppliers of the drugs. An athlete has to find those people and pay them well enough to keep them quiet. Marion's coach was a lot like Dr. Ferrari. He had already been associated with providing drugs to top athletes. The moment she contacted him and hired him to train her, everyone knew something was wrong. Clean athletes do not associate with dirty teams, dirty doctors, dirty coaches. Marion even flew to the Sidney Olympics with Victor Conte, the man behind BALCO. Both were so confident that those designer drugs could never be detected. Ultimately, her undoing was not a dirty test. They never caught her that way. She was foolish enough to not be careful when making payments to BALCO. When the feds searched BALCO, they discovered her personal checks, used to pay for her drugs. But her lawyers also explained that away. They threw her boyfriend, Tim Mongomery, under the bus, saying the drugs were his and that Marion had consistently tested clean. So, they got her coach to roll over on her. He saved a syringe and turned it in to be reverse engineered, so they could finally see what many athletes were dosing with.

The most honest thing you can say in a reply is that you don't care. You don't care if Lance took drugs. You will never believe he did. There is no evidence that would compell you to believe it. No testimony from anyone. If Johan testifies against Lance or if Ferrari testifies against him, you will say they are unreliable, liars, cheaters who just made a deal to get off light. So just say you will forever believe he was clean. You are failing so badly when it comes to debating this topic intelligently.


----------



## rydbyk (Oct 13, 2009)

bee said:


> Oh geez! There is no way that that roadie cesspool doping forum at RBR is the place to be. It is highly regulated by that loser Coolhand who is so obviously pro-drug and at the same time pro Armstrong that it ain't even funny. I casually checked out some posts there and you too are not kosher either. Your M.O. Is all about slyly disseminating Armstrong propaganda and always bringing up Lemond because you are obsessed with your hate for him. I suppose that is why you want people over there to control stuff that you cant here. Sorry, MTBR is where it is at!


Geez...harsh words..

Yep...kinda my point. Been there/done that. I was schooled by folks much more knowledgeable than myself. I just don't have the time or interest to follow all of the details day after day and year after year like some of those guys over there in the doping forum.

Sounds like you may have had a hard time communicating your thoughts over there and ended up over here to give it a shot?

FWIW, I am somewhat of a LeMond fan and truly hope that he did not dope during his era of domination.

As far as "controlling" anything, well, I wouldn't say I had any control over there at RBR, but thanks for the ego boost:thumbsup:

Also, as far as I recall, my last post over there in the doping forum was nearly a year ago


----------



## rydbyk (Oct 13, 2009)

bee said:


> Livestrong is a promotional, marketing company. They have admitted that they do not donate to cancer research. Donating to Livestrong, instead of a worthwhile company like the American Association for Cancer Research, is a terrible thing. Livestrong promotes Armstrong more than "cancer awareness" which is their stated cause. They are a huge marketing company not in the business of funding cancer research.


Yes indeed. It is important that people understand that Livestrong's focus is not cancer research, but instead "improving the lives of those stricken with cancer" sorta thing.

From what I have read, Livestrong is not all bad though..

Some financial contributors may be saddened to find that their money is not necessarily going towards research though...

Initially I too believed that Livestrong's focus was to "find a cure", but I simply logged on to their site and read about the organization...

.02


----------



## H0WL (Jan 17, 2007)

rydbyk said:


> Can I suggest that you all head on over to the "doping" forum on Roadbike Review (same company as MTBR)...? There is NOTHING here in this forum that can be discussed that has not already been discussed for the last 2+ years over there..


 There are multiple parallel universes on this issue.
Thread on the General Forum here on mtbr, another on my home forum, everywhere; a lot of different people but with the exact same arguments, pros/cons, for/anti, love it/hate it, just don't care. The best posts have links to in-depth articles. Always interesting to get more details.


----------



## Blurr (Dec 7, 2009)

The Prodigal Son said:


> You have reached a false conclusion. Based on the history of the most tested female athlete ever, and based on her own admissions, and based in an investigation of BALCO, information gathered from a search warrant issued for BALCO, we know a lot about how professional athletes use PED's and how they pass drug tests despite using PED's. It turns out you can have two professional athletes in the same sport and the difference between one earing $70,000 a year and the other winning over $1,000,000 a year, can be fractions of a second. That is the stoy of Marion Jones and also Tim Montgomery, the father of her child and her boyfriend and her co-conspirator.


 So ****ing what, this is not MARION JONES you Deft bastard, this is a whole new case with a whole new person who has a freakishly large heart giving him more endurance than other atheletes, but god forbid you look at the actual scientific evidence.
BTW, confessions under extreme constant pressure do not actually mean guilt, she was repeatedly investigated even by the feds (Evidently they have nothing better to do than worry about sports) and in the end finally crumbled.
But hey, Like I said earlier, the Law Does not care about facts, only about being right in their own mind and PUNISHING SOMEONE!!! you prove this with post after post continually ignoring lances larger heart, the fact that people may have seen him shoot up because HE ****ING HAS TO BECAUSE HE ONLY HAS ONE NUT and does so legally. Did they see how much he shoots up and know how much he is supposed to take? NO, thus back to hearsay and other ******** I already covered.



> It's important, when viewing the landscape of cheating athletes, you look at the other people involved, the coaches or doctors or suppliers of the drugs. An athlete has to find those people and pay them well enough to keep them quiet. Marion's coach was a lot like Dr. Ferrari. He had already been associated with providing drugs to top athletes. The moment she contacted him and hired him to train her, everyone knew something was wrong. Clean athletes do not associate with dirty teams, dirty doctors, dirty coaches. Marion even flew to the Sidney Olympics with Victor Conte, the man behind BALCO. Both were so confident that those designer drugs could never be detected. Ultimately, her undoing was not a dirty test. They never caught her that way. She was foolish enough to not be careful when making payments to BALCO. When the feds searched BALCO, they discovered her personal checks, used to pay for her drugs. But her lawyers also explained that away. They threw her boyfriend, Tim Mongomery, under the bus, saying the drugs were his and that Marion had consistently tested clean. So, they got her coach to roll over on her. He saved a syringe and turned it in to be reverse engineered, so they could finally see what many athletes were dosing with.


 Why in the hell are you stuck on one athlete, tens of thousands of professional aesthetes are tested yearly and pass, move on jug head.



> The most honest thing you can say in a reply is that you don't care. You don't care if Lance took drugs. You will never believe he did. There is no evidence that would compell you to believe it. No testimony from anyone. If Johan testifies against Lance or if Ferrari testifies against him, you will say they are unreliable, liars, cheaters who just made a deal to get off light. So just say you will forever believe he was clean.


 HE PASSED THE TESTS FOR YEARS AND YEARS, having witnesses who are pressured into testifying in order to to avoid possible charges or harsher sentences themselves does not amount to anything other than the typical legal juggernaut of corruption by the United States Legal system, which is the real issue here. 
But apparently that in your tiny mind is ok. because I mean after threatening to destroy someones life if they confess after you give them a way out obviously is guilt. 
I find it absolutely abured with the billions of dollars Americans were recently swindled out of that our legal system has nothing better to do than go after athletes taking energy pills.



> You are failing so badly when it comes to debating this topic intelligently.


L:ets see my argument "Lance past 500 tests based on our current standard of testing he passed"
Your argument "NO WAY SOMETHING IS WRONG, one ofter athlete who was pressured into confessing did so everyone is guilty, expain how he can perform so well"?

Yea uhmm Lances heart is 30 percent larger than normal

You *Birds chirping * As the hamster in your tiny brain struggles to turn a rusty cog.


----------



## roadie scum (Jan 21, 2011)

"Lance" is the only one claiming that Lance never failed a drug test.

Cookies must be enabled. | The Australian

60 Minutes Says Lance Armstrong DID Fail A Drug Test In 2001 - Business Insider

Lance Armstrong DID fail a drugs test in 2001, according to TV show 60 minutes · The Score

Lance Armstrong Failed Drug Test in 2001, Tyler Hamilton Tells 60 Minutes - Bloomberg

Lance Armstrong accused of covering up positive drug tests with help from authorities - The Washington Post

Here's The Problem With The Lance Armstrong Doping Investigation: There's No Proof! - Business Insider

Armstrong rider Fuyu fails drugs test - CNN.com


----------



## bee (Apr 7, 2008)

roadie scum said:


> "Lance" is the only one claiming that Lance never failed a drug test.
> 
> Cookies must be enabled. | The Australian
> 
> ...


Tons of good info there. You gotta give it in small bits to the Livestrong clan though. They won't even read any of it though.

It has never been proven that Armstrong is the most tested ever athlete in the universe. That info has only come from Armstrong along with his absurd claims about being tested 500 times. Armstrong lies about this stuff regularly. His former lawyer once said that Armstrong lies and can't ever be trusted. I mean, Armstrong is a guy who cheated on his wife. He cheats in all aspects of life. He can't stop cheating or lieing. Hopefully, he gets what he deserves.


----------



## SS Hack (Jan 20, 2012)

rydbyk said:


> Yes indeed. It is important that people understand that Livestrong's focus is not cancer research, but instead "improving the lives of those stricken with cancer" sorta thing.
> 
> From what I have read, Livestrong is not all bad though..
> 
> ...


According to a recent article in Outside Magazine (well respected publication: think Into Thin Air), Livestrong is setup to promote it's figurehead and make sure he remains well respected.

http://www.outsideonline.com/outdoo...rong/Its-Not-About-the-Lab-Rats.html?page=all


----------



## Blurr (Dec 7, 2009)

bee said:


> Tons of good info there. You gotta give it in small bits to the Livestrong clan though. They won't even read any of it though.
> 
> It has never been proven that Armstrong is the most tested ever athlete in the universe. That info has only come from Armstrong along with his absurd claims about being tested 500 times. Armstrong lies about this stuff regularly. His former lawyer once said that Armstrong lies and can't ever be trusted. I mean, Armstrong is a guy who cheated on his wife. He cheats in all aspects of life. He can't stop cheating or lieing. Hopefully, he gets what he deserves.


So what is it, he has been tested more than any other athlete in history or he lies about being tested 500 times?

Sensationalist media to the rescue of the Drama Seekers, but curious, if he did pay off the testing agency, how come those people are not under fire and in jail?

And how come ya'll keep avoid his enlarged heart?


----------



## Kliemann53 (Aug 11, 2009)

roadie scum said:


> "Lance" is the only one claiming that Lance never failed a drug test.
> 
> Cookies must be enabled. | The Australian
> 
> ...


These stories just come down to Hamiltons word against Armstrongs.


----------



## HarryCallahan (Nov 2, 2004)

The Prodigal Son said:


> Marion Jones passed nearly as many drug tests, yet it turned out she was doping the whole time. You need to understand there are many ways to beat the tests. OK, now that you understand beating the test is not proof of innocence, what do you think about Lance? Was he one of many cheaters? Was he the only person riding clean? Are you totally blind to all the other cheats Lance trained with and traveled with and lived with, and personally hired to be his doctor? If Lance had to be judged by a jury, he'd litterally pay millions to have you be one of the jurors.


Thank god you are out of the legal / justice system. In case you've forgotten it, we have a standard in this country called presumed innocence. The burden is on the gov't to prove guilt, not the accused to prove innocence.


----------



## The Prodigal Son (Apr 22, 2008)

Blurr said:


> So ****ing what, this is not MARION JONES you Deft bastard, this is a whole new case with a whole new person who has a freakishly large heart giving him more endurance than other atheletes, but god forbid you look at the actual scientific evidence.
> 
> There's not a dimes worth of difference between the Marion Jones investigation and the Lance Armstrong investigation. They are similar people. They surrounded themselves with cheaters who made a living out of helping athletes cheat drug testing. Marion passed nearly as many drug tests as Lance and you have nothing to say about that. We know she wasn't clean, yet she passed the tests for many years. So you know the tests are meaningless to people with the money and the means to subvert them.You know it and you keep repeating that Lance passing tests has meaning.
> 
> ...


You have still not made a compelling argument. You are very close to walking away from this thread without ever making a case. I know this because you have given up and turned to name calling.


----------



## The Prodigal Son (Apr 22, 2008)

HarryCallahan said:


> Thank god you are out of the legal / justice system. In case you've forgotten it, we have a standard in this country called presumed innocence. The burden is on the gov't to prove guilt, not the accused to prove innocence.


Presumed innocent until proven guilty. Noted. You left out presumed innocent even after proven guilty. Or was OJ proven innocent? Did you defend him on various forums as well?

I've been told I am missed at my former jobs as a uniform police officer and as a prison guard. As the fasted 200. 400, 800 meter and mile runner in the state, I ran down more fleeing criminals than all 600 other police officers combined. An that's without any performance enhancing drugs.


----------



## The Prodigal Son (Apr 22, 2008)

Blurr said:


> And how come ya'll keep avoid his enlarged heart?


Lamce Armstrong does not have an enlarged heart. Lance armstrong has a large heart. There is a big difference.

Wiki-amswers was asked the following question:

Why is lance Armstrong heart rate 32?

Answer:

This is a resting heart rate measurement for Lance. Generally these are taken when the person is either lying prone or sitting motionless, more than often in the morning after waking.
More importantly, it is because he is a well trained and conditioned athlete.

A highly trained endurance athlete often has a larger heart that is like an enlarged muscle. The training and the fitness level leads to a slow resting heart rate. A rate of 32-38 is extremely common for Olympic calibre athletes and Tour De France athletes

Get that. Not common, but extremely common for Olympic calibre athletes and Tour De France athletes. Lance was not an unusual enfurance athlete. I am not a world class athlete, but was more of a sprinter and middle distance runner, and I ran a marathon faster than Lance. He'd get crushed running against the best distance runners. But again, nothing about his heart is uncommon for an endurance athlete. If you still think it is, post some of your scientific information you so dearly love. So far, you are all talk, no facts, no science. Just a broken record talking about an enlarged heart and 500 passed tests. Is it fair to say you are an unreliable witness, providing only hearsay evidence?


----------



## Blurr (Dec 7, 2009)

The Prodigal Son said:


> You have still not made a compelling argument. You are very close to walking away from this thread without ever making a case. I know this because you have given up and turned to name calling.


Oh, so when you started saying I was not intelligent you lost the argument already? good to know

Dude, you fell on your face so many times, but hey you certainly have a right to your opinion.

Done beating this dead horse, Im outta here.


----------



## AZ (Apr 14, 2009)

> So what is it, he has been tested more than any other athlete in history or he lies about being tested 500 times?
> 
> 
> > Someone, anyone please present irrefutable proof that Lance has been tested more than 500 times. You know, something other than "Lance said". It would add some weight to the argument that he is innocent if someone could.
> ...


----------



## Blurr (Dec 7, 2009)

Interesting article

The Science of Lance Armstrong: Born, and Built, to Win


----------



## AZ (Apr 14, 2009)

Blurr said:


> Interesting article
> 
> The Science of Lance Armstrong: Born, and Built, to Win


One more sample and it would appear that he has a larger heart than normal. That article is interesting in the respect of Lance being the only human recorded to have increased his muscular efficiency. Makes one go "hmmmmmmm" wonder how that happened? Just sayin.


----------



## The Prodigal Son (Apr 22, 2008)

Blurr said:


> Done beating this dead horse, Im outta here.


Yup, I predicted this was about to happen. And it did. Post after post with no actual information. No science, no response to questions being rasied. Nothing left to do but make a much needed exit.

12:36 was when I predicted you'd scurry away. 1:59 was when you did exactly what all others like you have done in the past. Don't answer any questions, don't post links to claims, ignore all evidence, call others names, and then say it is a dead horse so you must leave. Should you return for one last insult, could you post one or two facts and scientific pieces of evidence, or something of substance, for a change?


----------



## The Prodigal Son (Apr 22, 2008)

AZ.MTNS said:


> One more sample and it would appear that he has a larger heart than normal. That article is interesting in the respect of Lance being the only human recorded to have increased his muscular efficiency. Makes one go "hmmmmmmm" wonder how that happened? Just sayin.


"We don't know exactly what accounted for Armstrong's muscular-efficiency change,"...

Lance knows


----------



## SS Hack (Jan 20, 2012)

The Prodigal Son said:


> "We don't know exactly what accounted for Armstrong's muscular-efficiency change,"...
> 
> Lance knows


Maybe just hard training like Barry Bonds?


----------



## bee (Apr 7, 2008)

Trust me. Barry Bonds is far, far cleaner than Armstrong is. I mean, Barry's only link to performance-enhancing drugs is suspicion that he was supplied it from his trainer.

Armstrong! on the other hand, had drugs supplied to him by a known EPO doctor, plus there is over 10 former teammates that witnessed him doing EPO, and also saying that Armstrong himself assisted them in getting the right doctors to get EPO.

The public treats Bonds like a felon because he is a big muscular black man. The public treats Armstrong like a hero because he had cancer. Guess which one is the dirtier of the two? Yep, Armstrong.


----------



## bee (Apr 7, 2008)

Kliemann53 said:


> These stories just come down to Hamiltons word against Armstrongs.


Yeah you wish. Hincapie says that Armstrong did EPO so did Landis, so did like 10 other former teammates, so did a large number of other team personnel.

It is also a misconception that Lance never tested positive. Nope. That is just Armstrong propaganda. Armstrong has tested positive multiple times for corticosteroids, masking agents for testosterone, and EPO. Getting off on coverups doesn't mean he never tested positive. He did.


----------



## rydbyk (Oct 13, 2009)

June Bug said:


> There are multiple parallel universes on this issue.
> Thread on the General Forum here on mtbr, another on my home forum, everywhere; a lot of different people but with the exact same arguments, pros/cons, for/anti, love it/hate it, just don't care. The best posts have links to in-depth articles. Always interesting to get more details.


Yeh, I am guessing that the triathlon forums are finally getting lit up with this now too. A little late, but bound to happen considering his recent course record in Hawaii and recent disqualification from Ironman Kona this summer...


----------



## rydbyk (Oct 13, 2009)

bee said:


> Yeah you wish. Hincapie says that Armstrong did EPO so did Landis, so did like 10 other former teammates, so did a large number of other team personnel.
> 
> It is also a misconception that Lance never tested positive. Nope. That is just Armstrong propaganda. Armstrong has tested positive multiple times for corticosteroids, masking agents for testosterone, and EPO. Getting off on coverups doesn't mean he never tested positive. He did.


We get it. You are the "unique" guy who knows Lance is a doper right? I hate to steal your thunder, but nearly everyone who is somewhat knowledgeable about the world of professional road cycling agrees with you already.

Did you come here to educate us mountain bikers..haha

Now, considering that many other pros/contenders within that colorful peloton were most likely doped to the gills during Lance's career (see neat chart in thread), why so much hate towards Lance?

Is it because you think:
A. Lance is simply a jerk
B. Lance had better access to better dope compared to the poorer teams
C. Lance gets protection under the Livestrong umbrella
D. He won so many times and should pay for his success now
E. He rides a Trek and is from Texas
F. He lied more extensively than others before him
G. Lance won too many times and should have quit after win #6
H. All of the above

I am curious. Do tell.


----------



## Lenny7 (Sep 1, 2008)

8 years ago I was speeding, 75mph in a 60. No police saw me, but there are about 8 witnesses who did and they are pretty sure I was speeding. 8 years later they are going to give me a ticket because of the witnesses. Seems fair.


----------



## SS Hack (Jan 20, 2012)

rydbyk said:


> We get it. You are the "unique" guy who knows Lance is a doper right? I hate to steal your thunder, but nearly everyone who is somewhat knowledgeable about the world of professional road cycling agrees with you already.
> 
> Did you come here to educate us mountain bikers..haha
> 
> ...


How about "C"? Pretty low if true.


----------



## Stugotz (Dec 14, 2011)

Is anyone surprised Lance is re-neging on what he Said last month about not fighting back?!?

Original article on lance from last May

"...On the ongoing investigation by the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency:
"In my mind, I'm truly done. You can interpret that however you want. But no matter what happens, I'm finished. I'm done fighting. I've moved on. If there are other things that arise, I'm not contesting anything. Case closed.""


----------



## The Prodigal Son (Apr 22, 2008)

Lenny7 said:


> 8 years ago I was speeding, 75mph in a 60. No police saw me, but there are about 8 witnesses who did and they are pretty sure I was speeding. 8 years later they are going to give me a ticket because of the witnesses. Seems fair.


Eight years ago I murdered someone. No police saw me do it, but there were eight witnesses present that did. Eight years later police still want to make a big deal about it, because I forgot to pay off all the witnesses. Seems fair.


----------



## SS Hack (Jan 20, 2012)

The Prodigal Son said:


> Eight years ago I murdered someone. No police saw me do it, but there were eight witnesses present that did. Eight years later police still want to make a big deal about it, because I forgot to pay off all the witnesses. Seems fair.


Did you start a "nonprofit" devoted to keeping your good name good? That makes it fair I guess.


----------



## rydbyk (Oct 13, 2009)

The Prodigal Son said:


> Eight years ago I murdered someone. No police saw me do it, but there were eight witnesses present that did. Eight years later police still want to make a big deal about it, because I forgot to pay off all the witnesses. Seems fair.


*don't forget that today the witnesses are accused of being part of the cover up that lead to defendant getting away with said "murder" for the last 8 years

This is USADA's stance on bringing allegations/charges dating back further than the statute of limitations typically allows...


----------



## Stugotz (Dec 14, 2011)

*Point-Counterpoint responses to Armstrong defenses*

1. He's "never tested positive."

Neither has Marion Jones, and she admitted to doping for years. Neither did Barry Bonds. Neither did Valverde, Basso, Ullrich.

In fact, Lance did test positive for cortisone in '99, for which he obtained a post-dated TUE. Further, we have the issue of the 6 samples. The allegation is now that he again tested positive in 2001, but that was covered up.

2. This is a waste of taxpayer money.

The stated purpose of the USADA is to investigate doping in sport. Armstrong is still actively competing. Further, the USADA is NOT a government agency. It gets funding, like many other agencies. It gets that funding regardless, so there is no incremental cost. It gets its funding from the Office of National Drug Control Policy as well as other grants.

3. They are arbitrarily targeting Armstrong.

Per the USADA letter, Lance was given the same opportunity to talk as other cyclists. He is the only one who refused. If innocent, why refuse an opportunity to set the record straight and end all the investigations?

4. What happened to "innocent until proven guilty"?

Nothing happened. Armstrong is not in jail. He's not under house arrest. He's a free man. He has until June 22 to respond to the charges. The WTC, which is a PRIVATE organization, bars any athlete under doping investigation from competing in their events.

5. Those testifying against him are discredited.

No, the only ones against whom that charged can even be plausible are Hamilton and Landis, both of whom have very good reasons to NOT testify against Armstrong. Hincapie was Lance's right-hand man, and the guy Lance called a "brother". Others expected to testify have not had their credibility challenged at all.

6. This is in the past. Why drag this stuff up now?

Many people stood up to Armstrong's lies and bullying and saw their careers and well-being suffer. These people include: Kimmage, both Andreus (especially Betsy), Greg Lemond, David Walsh, among others. These people had the courage to stand up against a well-funded and well-supported alleged doping cheat. They said things that were not popular then, but are borne out by the evidence now. Not acknowledging the truth does a disservice to those who speak out against those who misuse their power and position.

7. He's undergone over 500 tests. He's the most tested athlete ever.

The 500 figure is straight from Armstrong and has not been verified by any organization. In fact, he has undergone fewer than 30 tests by USADA. There is no support to Armstrong's claim that he is the most tested athlete ever.

Furthermore, many of these tests could not detect the specific chemicals and procedures allegedly used. There were no tests for HGH or autologous blood doping. Micro-dosing was virtually impossible to detect. Further, former cyclists and other officials have noted that they were often warned of impending tests, giving them time to use saline solutions to dilute the blood.


----------



## Trond (Mar 7, 2004)

SS Hack said:


> Did you start a "nonprofit" devoted to keeping your good name good? That makes it fair I guess.


Did you buy EPO on the illegal market, taking drugs from those who really need it? The cancer patients waiting in line for treatment? Seems fair.

Especially when you run a cancer foundation.


----------



## Kliemann53 (Aug 11, 2009)

|Who are the 10 witnesses?


----------



## Stugotz (Dec 14, 2011)

Kliemann53 said:


> |Who are the 10 witnesses?


This would be my guess:

Floyd
Tyler
Hincapie
Leipheimer
Vande Velde
Zabriskie
Andreu
Vaughters?
McCarty?
Danielson?
Barry?
Cruz?


----------



## Blurr (Dec 7, 2009)

The Prodigal Son said:


> Yup, I predicted this was about to happen. And it did. Post after post with no actual information. No science, no response to questions being rasied. Nothing left to do but make a much needed exit.
> 
> 12:36 was when I predicted you'd scurry away. 1:59 was when you did exactly what all others like you have done in the past. Don't answer any questions, don't post links to claims, ignore all evidence, call others names, and then say it is a dead horse so you must leave. Should you return for one last insult, could you post one or two facts and scientific pieces of evidence, or something of substance, for a change?


Yea you won yer a internet herooooo 
:thumbsup:


----------



## FLMike (Sep 28, 2008)

Blurr said:


> Done beating this dead horse, Im outta here.





Blurr said:


> Yea you won yer a internet herooooo
> :thumbsup:


That didnt last long...


----------



## Stugotz (Dec 14, 2011)

Sir Charles weighs in on the subject.


----------



## bee (Apr 7, 2008)

rydbyk said:


> *don't forget that today the witnesses are accused of being part of the cover up that lead to defendant getting away with said "murder" for the last 8 years
> 
> This is USADA's stance on bringing allegations/charges dating back further than the statute of limitations typically allows...


Ain't no such thing as the statute of limitations as it pertains to long-term doping offenses when the most recent doping offense have occurred within th past few years. Precedent has already been set for that. And, your boyhood hero Armstrong, already is under fire for doping last year and a half ago.

I know yr game. I read your stick and searched your old posts on the RBR. You only educated yourself to this stuff via your beliefs in Armstrong propaganda. You attempted to discredit others on RBR. Not cool dude. You wrote about how doped up Barry Bonds is. Are you racist? I read your stuff.

Barry Bonds is a steroided up muscular black man. He must be guilty, right? And your boy, Armstrong, what? He's so lean, and he wouldn't do anything post cancer to hurt himself. He's innocent, right? Yeah, keep deluding yourself rydbyk. And keep promoting your pro-drug stance because "everyone" does it and Lance is ok in your books. Whatevs. I know peeps like you.


----------



## 1niceride (Jan 30, 2004)

I was baffled when I was reading all this. I got it figured out..I get the same feeling when going through all this as when the wife talks at me.


----------



## floydlippencott (Sep 4, 2010)

1niceride said:


> I was baffled when I was reading all this. I got it figured out..I get the same feeling when going through all this as when the wife talks at me.


Did this thread yell at you and tell you to shut up, cause that's what my wife does?


----------



## H0WL (Jan 17, 2007)

Blurr said:


> Interesting article The Science of Lance Armstrong: Born, and Built, to Win


Coyle's work on Lance has been severely criticized (essentially debunked) by his scientific peers in the field of applied physiology:
Scientific Error Reignites Debate About Armstrong 
The Coyle study on Armstrong: A "minor error" or a scientific "hoax?" Analysis and insight


----------



## Mr.P (Feb 8, 2005)

Stugotz said:


> 7. He's undergone over 500 tests. He's the most tested athlete ever.
> 
> The 500 figure is straight from Armstrong and has not been verified by any organization. In fact, he has undergone fewer than 30 tests by USADA. There is no support to Armstrong's claim that he is the most tested athlete ever.
> 
> Furthermore, many of these tests could not detect the specific chemicals and procedures allegedly used. There were no tests for HGH or autologous blood doping. Micro-dosing was virtually impossible to detect. Further, former cyclists and other officials have noted that they were often warned of impending tests, giving them time to use saline solutions to dilute the blood.


Each TDF stage winner and leader are tested after every stage.

Surly Lance could have doped. Very possible the doping was ahead of the testing. But we have no fracking proof.

Your examples are similar to Lance's defence, based on faith more that proof.

I'm more in line with physical evidence than theory.

P


----------



## Lenny7 (Sep 1, 2008)

The Prodigal Son said:


> Eight years ago I murdered someone. No police saw me do it, but there were eight witnesses present that did. Eight years later police still want to make a big deal about it, because I forgot to pay off all the witnesses. Seems fair.


Wow, murder and alleged cheating in a bike race? You are really, really, really, really bad at analogies.


----------



## iamunchien (Mar 30, 2008)

Lenny7 said:


> Wow, murder and alleged cheating in a bike race? You are really, really, really, really bad at analogies.


hahahaha +1. yeah that's pretty bad.

meow?


----------



## rydbyk (Oct 13, 2009)

bee said:


> Ain't no such thing as the statute of limitations as it pertains to long-term doping offenses when the most recent doping offense have occurred within th past few years. Precedent has already been set for that. And, your boyhood hero Armstrong, already is under fire for doping last year and a half ago.
> 
> I know yr game. I read your stick and searched your old posts on the RBR. You only educated yourself to this stuff via your beliefs in Armstrong propaganda. You attempted to discredit others on RBR. Not cool dude. You wrote about how doped up Barry Bonds is. Are you racist? I read your stuff.
> 
> Barry Bonds is a steroided up muscular black man. He must be guilty, right? And your boy, Armstrong, what? He's so lean, and he wouldn't do anything post cancer to hurt himself. He's innocent, right? Yeah, keep deluding yourself rydbyk. And keep promoting your pro-drug stance because "everyone" does it and Lance is ok in your books. Whatevs. I know peeps like you.


I think something may be seriously wrong with you. That red chiclet over to the left speaks volumes and it all makes sense now.

I think you may have me mixed up partially with some other posts from other members perhaps...

I know that you will not read this, but I will say it again... I think LA is a full on doper. Got it? I don't recall what I may have said about Bonds regarding the use of steroids, but if I did mention it, great!

I also firmly feel that Bonds used steroids....much like Big McGwire imo. Not sure how exactly that makes me any sort of racist...but hey you are entitled to your opinion.

Troll on... Stalk on...


----------



## bt (Nov 24, 2007)

NPD will eventually bring him down.


----------



## bee (Apr 7, 2008)

rydbyk said:


> I think something is seriously wrong with you dude. That red chiclet over to the left speaks volumes.
> 
> I think you may have me mixed up partially with some other posts from other members perhaps...
> 
> ...


On no you don't. I've seen your game over on RBR. Don't try to play innocent. You are pro-drug and your hero, Armstrong, is the best of the druggies out there. Isn't that true? Yeah. Say it. Armstrong used EPO, so you say. And you want to disseminate your opinion that its a fair game since "everyone" did it. You aim to discredit others with your opinions stated as facts. I did see your rants about Barry Bonds. And everyone knows your hate for Greg Lemond. And everyone also knows about your schtick for Armstrong. And yes, I did ask if you are a racist. Are you?

Don't be coy now. You call me troll. I'm calling a spade a spade. Don't run and hide behind your lies presented as the truth. And your opinions presented as fact. What do you know about Barry Bonds beyond the opinion of him being a muscular black man that you assume must be because of steroids? No facts? You can't separate fact from opinion. You disciple of all things Armstrong. So, you want to call me a troll? Go back to your safety nest that is RBR and buddy up to that Coolhand guy. You guys got a lot in common.


----------



## jet9n8 (May 1, 2008)

bee said:


> On no you don't. I've seen your game over on RBR. Don't try to play innocent. You are pro-drug and your hero, Armstrong, is the best of the druggies out there. Isn't that true? Yeah. Say it. Armstrong used EPO, so you say. And you want to disseminate your opinion that its a fair game since "everyone" did it. You aim to discredit others with your opinions stated as facts. I did see your rants about Barry Bonds. And everyone knows your hate for Greg Lemond. And everyone also knows about your schtick for Armstrong. And yes, I did ask if you are a racist. Are you?
> 
> Don't be coy now. You call me troll. I'm calling a spade a spade. Don't run and hide behind your lies presents as the truth. And your opinions presented as fact. What do you know about Barry Bonds beyond the opinion of him being a muscular black man that you assume must have done steroids? No facts? You can't separate fact from opinion. You disciple of all things Armstrong. So, you want to call me a troll? Go back to your safety nest that is RBR and buddy up to that Coolhand guy. You guys got a lot in common.


Two words:
RED CHICLET

Now go troll somewhere else please.


----------



## PdlPwr (Nov 16, 2010)

Doping? I though it was a requirement at that level of competition. I always felt they all did it but just kept it hidden to maintain the "image" sort of like the facade of pro wrestling.


----------



## G8TR (May 10, 2012)

PdlPwr said:


> Doping? I though it was a requirement at that level of competition. I always felt they all did it but just kept it hidden to maintain the "image" sort of like the facade of pro wrestling.


I've wondered that too. Isn't it all done for the general public's entertainment anyways? If we didn't care, there'd be no money in the sport and no incentive to cheat.


----------



## AZ (Apr 14, 2009)

bee said:


> On no you don't. I've seen your game over on RBR. Don't try to play innocent. You are pro-drug and your hero, Armstrong, is the best of the druggies out there. Isn't that true? Yeah. Say it. Armstrong used EPO, so you say. And you want to disseminate your opinion that its a fair game since "everyone" did it. You aim to discredit others with your opinions stated as facts. I did see your rants about Barry Bonds. And everyone knows your hate for Greg Lemond. And everyone also knows about your schtick for Armstrong. And yes, I did ask if you are a racist. Are you?
> 
> Don't be coy now. You call me troll. I'm calling a spade a spade. Don't run and hide behind your lies presented as the truth. And your opinions presented as fact. What do you know about Barry Bonds beyond the opinion of him being a muscular black man that you assume must be because of steroids? No facts? You can't separate fact from opinion. You disciple of all things Armstrong. So, you want to call me a troll? Go back to your safety nest that is RBR and buddy up to that Coolhand guy. You guys got a lot in common.


You need to stop.

EDIT: Stop PMing also.


----------



## roadie scum (Jan 21, 2011)

bee said:


> On no you don't. I've seen your game over on RBR. Don't try to play innocent. You are pro-drug and your hero, Armstrong, is the best of the druggies out there. Isn't that true? Yeah. Say it. Armstrong used EPO, so you say. And you want to disseminate your opinion that its a fair game since "everyone" did it. You aim to discredit others with your opinions stated as facts. I did see your rants about Barry Bonds. And everyone knows your hate for Greg Lemond. And everyone also knows about your schtick for Armstrong. And yes, I did ask if you are a racist. Are you?
> 
> Don't be coy now. You call me troll. I'm calling a spade a spade. Don't run and hide behind your lies presented as the truth. And your opinions presented as fact. What do you know about Barry Bonds beyond the opinion of him being a muscular black man that you assume must be because of steroids? No facts? You can't separate fact from opinion. You disciple of all things Armstrong. So, you want to call me a troll? Go back to your safety nest that is RBR and buddy up to that Coolhand guy. You guys got a lot in common.


For the love of what is good and right, *BANHAMMER *please.

Oh and no PM's please, get that ou of the way right now, no PM's.


----------



## bee (Apr 7, 2008)

It's easy to publicly jump on someone who is an advocate for what is right. And in this case, only rydbyk know what he did on that other forum. The other issue is that AZ.MTN has gotten away with ganging up on less-than popular users on this forum and following them around to other threads. So, a polite PM requesting them to stop doing that is more than appropriate. A response of stop PMing me, I will continue doing what I want is not cool.


----------



## AZ (Apr 14, 2009)

bee said:


> It's easy to publicly jump on someone who is an advocate for what is right. And in this case, only rydbyk know what he did on that other forum. The other issue is that AZ.MTN has gotten away with ganging up on less-than popular users on this forum and following them around to other threads. So, a polite PM requesting them to stop doing that is more than appropriate. A response of stop PMing me, I will harass you and whoever I want is not cool.


Just stop. And the lies need to stop.


----------



## bedwards1000 (May 31, 2011)

Soooooooo......... It would have been fun to watch Lance compete in the Ironman. Too bad we can't.


----------



## bee (Apr 7, 2008)

AZ.MTNS said:


> Just stop. And the lies need to stop.


Stop stalking me! I PMed you to tell you to stop ganging up on less-than-popular posters. And you say stop PMing me. So, then STOP following me around.

Review this thread. You slung the first salvo. You don't get to sit there and then claim that I started jack and for me to stop. Oh no. You need to check yourself. You STOP!


----------



## bee (Apr 7, 2008)

bedwards1000 said:


> Soooooooo......... It would have been fun to watch Lance compete in the Ironman. Too bad we can't.


At least with the trigeeks, the sporting body that regulates it is a lot more ethical than the UCI, so their athletes are probably cleaner too. We don't need a Armstrong going in there and bringing disrepute and drug allegations into that sport too.


----------



## floydlippencott (Sep 4, 2010)

roadie scum said:


> For the love of what is good and right, *BANHAMMER *please.
> 
> Oh and no PM's please, get that ou of the way right now, no PM's.


/\ This.


----------



## bee (Apr 7, 2008)

Stugotz said:


> Is anyone surprised Lance is re-neging on what he Said last month about not fighting back?!?
> 
> Original article on lance from last May
> 
> ...


I am not surprised. Your link shows how Armstrong often lies about cooperating with any investigation. He actually tweeted that he was glad the federal investigation was dropped last February and then also tweeted that he would welcome USADA investigating so that he could clear his name. It was all for marketing though, because when it came time for him to meet with USADA, he refused. And then went back to his tired propaganda again about unfair witch hunts, and fishing trip expeditions.


----------



## rydbyk (Oct 13, 2009)

bee said:


> It's easy to publicly jump on someone who is an advocate for what is right. And in this case, only rydbyk know what he did on that other forum. The other issue is that AZ.MTN has gotten away with ganging up on less-than popular users on this forum and following them around to other threads. So, a polite PM requesting them to stop doing that is more than appropriate. A response of stop PMing me, I will continue doing what I want is not cool.


Haha. I feel like I just made eye contact with the crazy man in the park


----------



## bee (Apr 7, 2008)

rydbyk said:


> Haha. I feel like I just made eye contact with the crazy man in the park


 I know your game. You do this on RBR too. You saw my posts.  and you saw the one at the top of this page that everyone else saw. Talk about making eye contact . Yeah, you put out the barbs, but don't even respond when others have questioned you on stuff you had said :nono:


----------



## 53119 (Nov 7, 2008)

i say we ban this thread til after the investigation because presumably anything that is said is all bs posturing from all players, haters and fanboys alike. trash talkin during the weigh-in is mildly entertaining but it doesn't mean shite.


----------



## HarryCallahan (Nov 2, 2004)

bedwards1000 said:


> Soooooooo......... It would have been fun to watch Lance compete in the Ironman. Too bad we can't.


Agreed! Seems like kind of BS for them to say you can't compete if you are under investigation somewhere else. There have to be better ways of handling that, such as flagging those contestants for automatic testing at the event.


----------



## bee (Apr 7, 2008)

Kliemann53 said:


> |Who are the 10 witnesses?


Actually, there are more than 10 witnesses. And out of that 10+ number, those are just the former teammates. There are other witness that are former team employees, not cyclists.

That guy Sandusky only has to deal with 8 witnesses for alleged child molestation charges. And his defense so far is that the 8 little boys colluded and are making false claims. It is eerily similar to the defense strategy that Armstrong attorneys are using.


----------



## Lenny7 (Sep 1, 2008)

bee said:


> Actually, there are more than 10 witnesses. And out of that 10+ number, those are just the former teammates. There are other witness that are former team employees, not cyclists.
> 
> That guy Sandusky only has to deal with 8 witnesses for alleged child molestation charges. And his defense so far is that the 8 little boys colluded and are making false claims. It is eerily similar to the defense strategy that Armstrong attorneys are using.


Wow, what a sick comparison. The difference other than innocent children getting molested by some sick old man is, in the Sandusky case the VICTIMS didn't just see something, it happened to them. They are VICTIMS not witnesses.


----------



## bee (Apr 7, 2008)

Lenny7 said:


> Wow, what a sick comparison. The difference other than innocent children getting molested by some sick old man is, in the Sandusky case the VICTIMS didn't just see something, it happened to them. They are VICTIMS not witnesses.


Can they not be both victims and witnesses? In fact, that is how they are legally characterized as. And as a parallel then, Armstrong would have thousands, tens of thousands, and more victims.


----------



## Lenny7 (Sep 1, 2008)

bee said:


> Can they not be both victims and witnesses? In fact, that is how they are legally characterized as. And as a parallel then, Armstrong would have thousands, tens of thousands, and more victims.


You are talking about witnesses who did or didn't SEE someone do something. In the Sandusky trail those "witnesses" had something done directly to them. I won't split hairs with you, but those two don't belong in the same conversation.


----------



## bee (Apr 7, 2008)

Lenny7 said:


> You are talking about witnesses who did or didn't SEE someone do something. In the Sandusky trail those "witnesses" had something done directly to them. I won't split hairs with you, but those two don't belong in the same conversation.


Ey. Yeah I know that. Sandusky is on trial for allegedly molesting boys. It is a child molestation case. Armstrong isn't on trial, but his defense strategy is the same. Sandusky's attorneys are trying to discredit the boys, who are now grown up, by saying that they colluded and have financial interests as these incidents happened in the distant past. It's the same defense strategy that Armstrong's people uses.


----------

