|
On August 24 2012 12:52 Scaramanga wrote:
Would possibly be the biggest news story sport has ever seen
This will likely backlash on the USADA too.
Lance Armstrong doesn't. He's chosen to forgo the arbitration without disputing it.
Let me kindly point you to my list of 3 points. He went through every channel to fight it, but has determined that he will not be given due process in the course of the drawn out bullshit that occurred. His rejection to continue fighting something that is essentially unwinnable is not an admittance of guilt.
|
Well, that really hurts the integrity of cycling doesn't it, when your sport's most celebrated and the athlete that has become the "face" of the sport to mainstream audiences is punished like this.
|
On another note, I saw Lance Armstrong recently at a Sporting Kansas City soccer game, pretty awesome to see such a figure sitting in normal seats just enjoying the moment  still will be a fan no matter what happens.
|
The 40-year-old Armstrong walked away from the sport in 2011 without being charged following a two-year federal criminal investigation into many of the same accusations he faces from USADA. The federal probe was closed in February, but USADA announced in June it had evidence Armstrong used banned substances and methods -- and encouraged their use by teammates. The agency also said it had blood tests from 2009 and 2010 that were "fully consistent" with blood doping.
Included in USADA's evidence were emails written by Armstrong's former U.S. Postal Service teammate Floyd Landis, who was stripped of his 2006 Tour de France title after a positive drug test. Landis' emails to a USA Cycling official detailed allegations of a complex doping program on the team.
USADA also said it had 10 former Armstrong teammates ready to testify against him. Other than suggesting they include Landis and Tyler Hamilton, both of whom have admitted to doping offenses, the agency has refused to say who they are or specifically what they would say.
From the second article. They claim to have blood tests from 2009/2010 that show blood doping.
|
Wow, this is big, hope this will be dealt with justice and no mistakes are made.. :\
|
Of course he was doping. I'm glad the USADA is making an example out of him
|
On August 24 2012 12:52 Scaramanga wrote:
Would possibly be the biggest news story sport has ever seen
Lance Armstrong IS the sport, you didn't know this?
|
On August 24 2012 12:34 wurm wrote:
ITT: Nobody reads the articles in the OP.
The fact that is ignored in any doping story: Regardless of whether Lance doped or not (I think chances are, he did), most of his peers did the same thing.
Here's what I say about the baseball steroids era. Don't ban them all from entering the hall of fame. For every outed cheater, there were hundreds who didn't get the spotline shined on them but were just as guilty. We can't in good conscience choose who cheated and who didn't because we just don't know. Instead, create a separate area for their era in the hall of fame. "These guys played in an era where a large percentage of players were doping (imo, you can't even call it cheating because baseball wasn't enforcing anything) and thus you should look at their statistics in the context of their era (similar to how we don't compare the dead ball era to the live ball era statistically)." They were still the best of their time and it was still a largely even playing field (because both pitchers and hitters were juicing). I'll maintain until the day I die that Barry Bonds at his apex was the best hitter I've ever seen and I think he should be in the hall of fame.
That was a little long winded but as a casual follower of cycling, I gather that the race looks quite a bit different now than it did during Lance's heyday. That tells me that many/most of the field was cheating and as such, this witchhunt is pointless. If you strip Armstrong of his titles, how far down do you have to go until you actually get to someone who was legit and not just someone who didn't get caught? Nobody can know that, so this is all a pointless exercise.
|
On August 24 2012 12:56 thebigdonkey wrote:Show nested quote +On August 24 2012 12:34 wurm wrote:
ITT: Nobody reads the articles in the OP. The fact that is ignored in any doping story: Regardless of whether Lance doped or not (I think chances are, he did), most of his peers did the same thing. Here's what I say about the baseball steroids era. Don't ban them all from entering the hall of fame. For every outed cheater, there were hundreds who didn't get the spotline shined on them but were just as guilty. We can't in good conscience choose who cheated and who didn't because we just don't know. Instead, create a separate area for their era in the hall of fame. "These guys played in an era where a large percentage of players were doping (imo, you can't even call it cheating because baseball wasn't enforcing anything) and thus you should look at their statistics in the context of their era (similar to how we don't compare the dead ball era to the live ball era statistically)." They were still the best of their time and it was still a largely even playing field (because both pitchers and hitters were juicing). I'll maintain until the day I die that Barry Bonds at his apex was the best hitter I've ever seen and I think he should be in the hall of fame. That was a little long winded but as a casual follower of cycling, I gather that the race looks quite a bit different now than it did during Lance's heyday. That tells me that many/most of the field was cheating and as such, this witchhunt is pointless. If you strip Armstrong of his titles, how far down do you have to go until you actually get to someone who was legit and not just someone who didn't get caught? Nobody can know that, so this is all a pointless exercise.
I'd rather see them not giving those tour wins to anyone then. Letting someone who cheated keep his prize just because others cheated to isn't the solution. Just leave the worst years of tour the france winnerless.
|
On August 24 2012 12:55 Benjamin99 wrote:
Of course he was doping. I'm glad the USADA is making an example out of him
Prove it. Fairly. 
|
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I just read two articles relating to the Lance Armstrong debacle and neither have demonstrated any proof that he did anything wrong. If anything they show that he has passed numerous drug tests in the past. I'm not saying I have any opinions on what actually happened pertaining to the use of blood doping, but I will say I think a lot people need to read the article before posting.
|
I think he cheated but I also think a lot of others were doping as well so it's still a pretty impressive record that he set
|
He could have at least the balls to public admit it.
He only admit over the backdoor when its already clear.
but what do you expect from a cheater...
To all the fans here:
I understand you are disappointed.
But keep on lying to yourself, when its so obvious, dont help you at all.
|
Their supposed evidence is 10 of his friends saying they have proof he doped, really conclusive there! Brb getting 10 people to say tupac is still alive, will only take 1,000$ each for them to lie. TUPAC IS ALIVE.
|
doping isnt cheating probably everybody does it. in fact if you dont dope then you are at a huge disadvantage. they need to just make it OK in all sports period there is no reason not to.
lance is a hero.
|
On August 24 2012 12:53 Bagration wrote:
Well, that really hurts the integrity of cycling doesn't it, when your sport's most celebrated and the athlete that has become the "face" of the sport to mainstream audiences is punished like this.
Well, the sport lost its credibility a long time ago.
Also, nice to see Armstrong getting what he deserves.
|
On August 24 2012 12:58 stevarius wrote:Show nested quote +On August 24 2012 12:55 Benjamin99 wrote:
Of course he was doping. I'm glad the USADA is making an example out of him Prove it. Fairly.
I think USADA is doing that. They got countless witnesses, Tyler Hamilton among others. Blood test that show traces of EPO etc. What more do you want. Bjarne Riis a Danish Tour De France winner said when he admitted he was doping that all cyclist was using some kind of doping that was just the state of the scene at the time.
Of course Lance was doping also he just need to grow some balls and man up and admit it like everyone else so the sport can close this chapter finally
On August 24 2012 13:05 fishjie wrote:
doping isnt cheating probably everybody does it. in fact if you dont dope then you are at a huge disadvantage. they need to just make it OK in all sports period there is no reason not to.
lance is a hero.
Doping is cheating buddy no matter how many others was using as well. You going to use the same argument for murder if everyone was doing that? Armstrong is not a hero he is a disgrace to the sport and if he had any dignity he would have admitted it years ago
|
Even if they didn't have real proof of doping his sport is so tainted he would never be able to escape it.
Him doing this will seem like an admission to some or a way to end the endless accusations to others.
Either way I hope this doesn't really effect his charitable works, which are massive.
|
On August 24 2012 13:05 skeldark wrote:
He could have at least the balls to public admit it.
He only admit over the backdoor when its already clear.
but what do you expect from a cheater...
There is no conclusive evidence he cheated, he could be telling the 100% honest truth, you've never once met the guy, so why start assuming with little childish irrational statements?
|
On August 24 2012 12:56 thebigdonkey wrote:Show nested quote +On August 24 2012 12:34 wurm wrote:
ITT: Nobody reads the articles in the OP. The fact that is ignored in any doping story: Regardless of whether Lance doped or not (I think chances are, he did), most of his peers did the same thing.
it's not ignored, multiple teammates of him have been proven guilty of doping and they (as well as some of his staff) have said multiple times armstrong was not clean either
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
