Lance Armstrong ends fight against doping charges

[Acker79]

The reasoned decision from the usada

Reasoned Decision

 

[vegster]

'Once there, she says she intends to become the first professional musician to sing from space.'

Hope this doesn't trigger an Independance Day style attack if she does.

Or a Prometheus style retribution

 

[Stat Brother]

Depending on who that is on the end, next to Basso.
There isn't a clean rider on that platform.

Journo's slurping Lance shocker.

 

[Wozza]

Wrong.

Regardless of this crap plenty of people still admire him greatly.

The guy beat cancer and tackled one of the toughest sporting pursuits in the world and used that fame to raise huges amounts of money for medical research, cancer awareness and charity.

Winner on so many levels.

Liar, cheat, faker, phoney, fraud... but does a lot of work for charity.

 

[Stat Brother]

For those interested or wanting to know more, I have just downloaded, from the 5 Live Sports Special section, an in depth report of the USADA report on Lance.
I'd image it also includes an interview with Tyler Hamilton.

 

[Glanders]

Cyclingnews.com has lots of coverage, as I imagine most other cycling sites do. As someone who has followed cycling voraciously for thirty years, races regularly and has two kids who are starting to race, I am just so glad that this massive twat and the whole sorry episode has finally been outed. I'm sure the apologists and witch hunt conspiracy theorists will still cling to their hero, but I'd like to think that's it for most of us.

 

[Stat Brother]

Liar, cheat, faker, phoney, fraud... but does a lot of work for charity.

For a long time now the innuendo vultures have been circling around the cash flow of Livestrong.

Personally I've always put it down to snipping from the people who couldn't pin Lance on drugs.

Either way, if there's anything too it, Lance's rough ride might only just be beginning.

 

[Indurain's Lungs]

I've now read the 202 page summary (full report is apparently around 3000 pages). It's pretty concrete stuff, it reads a bit like Hamilton's book but without any of the emotional stuff or self aggrandising. All the accusations are corroborated by multiple sources.

There is a quite extensive money trail to Ferrari which also involves other uses riders and riders from outside (Vino) being one. The testimony of 3 Italian riders nails Ferrari and implicates a lot of current riders including pozzato, kreuziger, possoni , garzelli.

Looks like Armstrong, chose not to fight as he didn't want to risk a prison sentence for perjury.

It's not the doping bit that is most concerning, we all know it was rife at that time (20/21 tour podium 99-05 implicated) but the machiavellian role Armstrong played in this and the implications that he was protected by the UCI.

Can only hope that the tide has turned with sky showing how to win clean - I'm pleased to see they've dumped Leinderss.

 

[Stat Brother]

The BBC Podcast does a pretty good job of touching on all the important stuff, but without getting too bogged down.

I guess we already know, but it leaves no doubt as to Lance's guilty and the depth that plumbed.

 

[Bold Seagull]

I've now read the 202 page summary (full report is apparently around 3000 pages). It's pretty concrete stuff, it reads a bit like Hamilton's book but without any of the emotional stuff or self aggrandising. All the accusations are corroborated by multiple sources.

There is a quite extensive money trail to Ferrari which also involves other uses riders and riders from outside (Vino) being one. The testimony of 3 Italian riders nails Ferrari and implicates a lot of current riders including pozzato, kreuziger, possoni , garzelli.

Looks like Armstrong, chose not to fight as he didn't want to risk a prison sentence for perjury.

It's not the doping bit that is most concerning, we all know it was rife at that time (20/21 tour podium 99-05 implicated) but the machiavellian role Armstrong played in this and the implications that he was protected by the UCI.

Can only hope that the tide has turned with sky showing how to win clean - I'm pleased to see they've dumped Leinderss.

The whole sport needs to have a sort of amnesty and face up to what was endemic and not just a few bad apples. Too many are still hiding behind glass houses. Armstrong is just the lead case, but for the tide to truly turn, it needs to be completely honest about it's past. Too much complicity still hangs in the air, it makes it very difficult for teams like Sky to be taken seriously as clean teams by the public at large when it is so difficult to know who to trust or believe. Hopefully this is a real chance to air the dirty laundry, and get it back on the line all sparkling clean and free from any dirt...

 

[Bold Seagull]

The BBC Podcast does a pretty good job of touching on all the important stuff, but without getting too bogged down.

I guess we already know, but it leaves no doubt as to Lance's guilty and the depth that plumbed.

Perhaps his foundation is truly the only way he had to somehow deal with his guilt. Out of his cheating no doubt he could tell himself a huge amount of good could be achieved, some how balancing the deeds so to speak.

 

[Stoichkov]

Can only hope that the tide has turned with sky showing how to win clean - I'm pleased to see they've dumped Leinderss.

How much confidence do you have in this? 100%? 75%? Less?

From following cycling since 1986, all I say is keep an open mind. I've seen loads of 'new generations' herald a new era and then get busted.

I hope Sky are clean and I reckon they are but if if everyone thinks the doping problem now simply stops with this USDA report then that complacency is very dangerous.

Sky should be put under more scrutiny than any team in the sport has been previously - if they keep coming up smelling of roses then the sport will at least be on the right track.

Christ, I expect to be shot down for this

 

[Stat Brother]

The whole sport needs to have a sort of amnesty and face up to what was endemic and not just a few bad apples. Too many are still hiding behind glass houses. Armstrong is just the lead case, but for the tide to truly turn, it needs to be completely honest about it's past. Too much complicity still hangs in the air, it makes it very difficult for teams like Sky to be taken seriously as clean teams by the public at large when it is so difficult to know who to trust or believe. Hopefully this is a real chance to air the dirty laundry, and get it back on the line all sparkling clean and free from any dirt...

All would be great but pointless if The UCI doesn't change.

 

[mejonaNO12 aka riskit]

From those who know more about this than me, can you tell me what difference (i.e how much) the doping actually does to an athletes performance?

I've always wondered this. It's obviously impossible to KNOW, but would LA have been good enough to possibly win without them, or do they really push you on a huge amount?

Let me clarify (as reading this back may appear that i'm Pro LA), I'm not claiming they don't matter as franlkly, I don't have a clue. I'm just genuinly interested into what these drugs do? Does the athlete already have to be PHENOMENALLY good for these to push them that extra yard, or do they produce a MASSIVE boost in performance?

 

[Stat Brother]

How much confidence do you have in this? 100%? 75%? Less?

From following cycling since 1986, all I say is keep an open mind. I've seen loads of 'new generations' herald a new era and then get busted.

I hope Sky are clean and I reckon they are but if if everyone thinks the doping problem now simply stops with this USDA report then that complacency is very dangerous.

Sky should be put under more scrutiny than any team in the sport has been previously - if they keep coming up smelling of roses then the sport will at least be on the right track.

Christ, I expect to be shot down for this

Nope they've chosen to sleep with the devil, this all comes with it.

I

 

[Bold Seagull]

All would be great but pointless if The UCI doesn't change.

Exactly, it needs to be a thorough examination through the entire sport, I completely agree.

Extract from the NY Times:
“It was not enough that his teammates give maximum effort on the bike, he [Armstrong] also required that they adhere to the doping program outlined for them or be replaced,” the antidoping agency said in its report. “He was not just a part of the doping culture on his team, he enforced and reinforced it.”

 

[Stat Brother]

From those who know more about this than me, can you tell me what difference (i.e how much) the doping actually does to an athletes performance?

I've always wondered this. It's obviously impossible to KNOW, but would LA have been good enough to possibly win without them, or do they really push you on a huge amount?

Let me clarify (as reading this back may appear that i'm Pro LA), I'm not claiming they don't matter as franlkly, I don't have a clue. I'm just genuinly interested into what these drugs do? Does the athlete already have to be PHENOMENALLY good for these to push them that extra yard, or do they produce a MASSIVE boost in performance?

It's all about boosting the red blood cell count.
Doing this gives your body more oxygen.
This allows you to go 'harder faster longer'!

Plus this will also help in recovery.

 

[Bold Seagull]

From those who know more about this than me, can you tell me what difference (i.e how much) the doping actually does to an athletes performance?

I've always wondered this. It's obviously impossible to KNOW, but would LA have been good enough to possibly win without them, or do they really push you on a huge amount?

Let me clarify (as reading this back may appear that i'm Pro LA), I'm not claiming they don't matter as franlkly, I don't have a clue. I'm just genuinly interested into what these drugs do? Does the athlete already have to be PHENOMENALLY good for these to push them that extra yard, or do they produce a MASSIVE boost in performance?

The benefit of a transfusion of half a litre of blood can provide the athlete with an additional half litre of oxygen to muscles per minute, at the same time increasing the capacity of the muscles to use oxygen by up to five percent.

http://bikepure.org/resources/list-of-banned-substances/types-of-drugs-and-methods-used-in-cycling/

 

[mejonaNO12 aka riskit]

So, could Armstrong POSSIBLY have been good enough without the drugs?

Would he still go 100% when on them to win or would he have to 'act' A LITTLE and tone down his performance to not raise suspicions?

 

[El Presidente]

Liar, cheat, faker, phoney, fraud... but does a lot of work for charity.

I thought this thread was about Lance Armstrong, not Jimmy Savile...