MacNN Forums (http://forums.macnn.com/)
-   MacNN Lounge (http://forums.macnn.com/macnn-lounge/)
-   -   Lance Armstrong Loses Endurance Test to USADA (http://forums.macnn.com/89/macnn-lounge/491653/lance-armstrong-loses-endurance-test-usada/)

 
kimosABE Aug 24, 2012 10:14 AM
Lance Armstrong Loses Endurance Test to USADA
In one of the most ironic outcomes in all of sports...any sport, cycling champion, cancer survivor and sport icon, Lance Armstrong, a man whose endurance was seemingly without limit, was outlasted in a test of endurance by the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency.




Quote
The U.S. Anti-Doping Agency has banned Lance Armstrong for life and stripped him of all seven Tour de France titles that helped make him an American hero.


Lance Armstrong decided on Thursday not to go to arbitration to dispute charges brought by the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency, which alleges the cyclist for years engaged in a blood-doping conspiracy.


The agency's action came one day after Armstrong decided not to fight the doping charges, saying "enough is enough" and refusing to recognize USADA's authority to sanction him.

In a release, USADA said his decision to skip arbitration prompted the immediate sanctions. He also must forfeit all results from Aug. 1, 1998, through today, which include the seven conseuctive Tour titles won from 1999 through 2005.

The agency said Armstrong received a lifetime ban because of "his numerous anti-doping rule violations, including his involvement in trafficking and administering doping products to others."
http://www.usatoday.com/sports/cycling/story/2012-08-23/Armstrong-doping-charges/57258616/1

His decision, however, isn't an admission of guilt. But it does show us that even an innocent man has to fight for freedom some times. Even a celebrated man with a six (+?) figure income. And in this case the fight costs are not in sweat and physical effort on a bike but a financially costly and mentally draining contest that can go on for years.

Like Lance Armstrong vs The Terminator - Model USADA.

I WANT him to be innocent because we need his example of courage and success through the most daunting of circumstances.

We need Lance Armstrong.
 
ShortcutToMoncton Aug 24, 2012 11:02 AM
We also need or have needed Miguel Cabrera, Mark McGuire, Barry Bonds, Sammy Sosa, Ben Johnson......the list goes on.
 
Eug Aug 24, 2012 11:39 AM
Heh. Memories. A buddy of mine memorized the Ben Johnson speech back then, complete with the jilted Jamaican accent.

I never ever knowingly take drug. When I was a boy, in Jamaica...

Ben Johnson is a Cheetah!
 
kimosABE Aug 24, 2012 11:43 AM
Quote, Originally Posted by ShortcutToMoncton (Post 4186030)
We also need or have needed Miguel Cabrera, Mark McGuire, Barry Bonds, Sammy Sosa, Ben Johnson......the list goes on.
Not quite the same. On your (usefully) brief list of suspected performance enhancement users only Mark McGuire and Sammy Sosa served anywhere near the same kind of societal function as Lance Armstrong.

When MLB was at a low point due to labor disputes and fractious negotiations which held the fans hostage it was Big Mac and Sammy who came along and with their massive and frequent home runs began a contest of titans. Men of extraordinary skill and strength, albeit artificial strength, began a home run race that captured the imagination of a hungry and hurting nation.

They helped return baseball to popularity.

We needed Mark and Sammy the same way we need Lance Armstrong.
 
Eug Aug 24, 2012 11:46 AM
Ben Johnson is the only one with has kept me amused over the years with his awful commercials. Thus, he's had much more an impact on me than the others. However, a friend did compose a short sonnet about Sammy.

Sammy Sosa, he's the mosa...
 
kimosABE Aug 24, 2012 11:51 AM
Quote, Originally Posted by Eug (Post 4186038)
Ben Johnson is the only one with has kept me amused over the years with his awful commercials. Thus, he's had much more an impact on me than the others. However, a friend did compose a short sonnet about Sammy.
Sammy Sosa, he's the mosa...
:lol:
 
Waragainstsleep Aug 24, 2012 12:22 PM
How can the USADA strip him of his TdF titles? Its a little out of their jurisdiction isn't it? I can imagine they might pressure the people who can but that excerpt doesn't make it sound like thats what happened.
 
mduell Aug 24, 2012 04:36 PM
Quote, Originally Posted by Waragainstsleep (Post 4186043)
How can the USADA strip him of his TdF titles? Its a little out of their jurisdiction isn't it? I can imagine they might pressure the people who can but that excerpt doesn't make it sound like thats what happened.
I think that's his position, USADA needs to petition UCI or CAS.
 
Mrjinglesusa Aug 25, 2012 06:27 PM
Smart move by Lance.

He knew full well that if he tried to fight this all of the testimony of these witnesses would be made public. So what does he do? Tries to get a court to rule the USADA can't do this. Court says, "Sorry Lance, we're not getting involved".

So faced with a parade of people testifying on the record that they saw him dope, that he told them he doped, and/or that he told them how to avoid getting caught doping, etc., Lance surrenders.

Now, I question whether the USADA has any jurisdiction here, specifically whether they can ban him from cycling and strip him of titles, but it's telling that Lance decided not to try and defend himself against these allegations.

Question: If what the CEO of the USADA is saying about Lance are not true as Lance claims, why doesn't Lance sue him for defamation/libel? He could point to all of his negative tests and the fact that a 2 year federal investigation of him turned up nothing as "proof" that these allegations are false.

Answer: He can't because he knows it's true. He knows the USADA has a positive test sample and he knows that the USADA has a list of people willing to testify under oath that they saw him dope, that he told them he doped, and/or that he told them how to avoid getting caught doping.
 
Mrjinglesusa Aug 25, 2012 06:45 PM
Quote, Originally Posted by kimosABE (Post 4186021)
In one of the most ironic outcomes in all of sports...any sport, cycling champion, cancer survivor and sport icon, Lance Armstrong, a man whose endurance was seemingly without limit, was outlasted in a test of endurance by the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency.
Not hard to have high endurance when you are taking EPO and having blood transfusions.

kimosABE"]
His decision, however, isn't an admission of guilt.[/quote]

It is in my mind. He's vigorously defended himself for DECADES, even as late as last year. Now, suddenly he decides "enough is enough"? Maybe, just maybe, he KNOWS the test the USADA is referring to and he KNOWS exactly who they have willing to testify. He doesn't want what these witnesses have to say going public.

kimosABE"]But it does show us that even an innocent man has to fight for freedom some times.[/quote]

Do you honestly believe he didn't dope on his way to 7 consecutive Tour titles? Please, dont' be naive.

kimosABE"]I WANT him to be innocent because we need his example of courage and success through the most daunting of circumstances.
We need Lance Armstrong.[/quote]

Lance Armstrong is an egomaniac and attention whore. This is man whose wife stood steadfastly by his side through his cancer, raised his kids while he was off biking, and then he left her for Sheryl Crow. Then, he dumps Sheryl Crow because as he said, she wanted to have kids and he wasn't ready, yet he knocked up his next girlfriend only a couple years later.

Frankly, other than his charity work I don't find much to like about the guy.
 
P Aug 26, 2012 02:59 AM
Quote, Originally Posted by mduell (Post 4186099)

I think that's his position, USADA needs to petition UCI or CAS.
Yep, that's his position. Whether that is correct is sort of untested waters, I understand. UCI has signed on to WADA's rules (WADA is the world equivalent of USADA) because any sport that does not will be kicked out of the Olympics. The question is whether that means that the local anti-doping agency can ban an athlete directly, or whether the UCI would be required to do so. Note that this is only stalling - if USADA petitions UCI to ban him and makes their case and UCI does not ban, there is no cycling in the next Olympics - so the only difference here is that UCI is not forced to ban their greatest athlete of the last decade or two, which would be a bitter pill to swallow.
 
Waragainstsleep Aug 26, 2012 07:16 AM
http://lancearmstrong.com/news-events/lance-armstongs-statement-of-august-23-2012
 
P Aug 26, 2012 08:40 AM
I think it was one of his team mates who explained the thinking they used: WADA bans substance A. To avoid false positives, they set a level of X mg of substance A (or its remnant products) in the urine as the acceptable level. Cycling teams would then experiment how much they could give athletes of substance A and stay under level X. They gave everyone this much - with some safety margin, obviously - and got away with it. Here's the difference in the thinking: at least some of the athletes figured that this was within the rules, the same way you can drive after drinking one beer, because you're likely not up to the legal limit. That's not the rules, however: Using substance A is banned, therefore taking a single drop of it is against the rules even if that can not be detected in urine. Obviously if you cannot rely on the physical evidence of the urine, you need other evidence - such as witnesses. That is what I think happened here.

I read all of Lance's statement, and it is quite interesting. Never in that document do the words "innocent" or "not guilty" appear. He never claims to have not taken any drugs, or even in a sentence dispute the facts of the matter. He attacks the process. That in itself is the clearest indication I've seen that what USADA is saying is true.
 
Shaddim Aug 26, 2012 09:33 PM
Whatever. I couldn't care less if it's true. Not a bit. Cycling is so dirty, and so many people dope, that it's just the standard practice. In a sport where everyone is breaking the rules, he was the best. To me that's the same as winning when everyone is playing fair. AFAIC, he can just tell them to suck his remaining nut, it doesn't matter.
 
Doc HM Aug 27, 2012 08:30 AM
I find it damning that Armstrong's pre investigation statements refer to him not having taken drugs BUT as soon as his statements start to become on the record or pertinent to any ongoing investigation they changed to "I have never failed a drugs test"
 
The Final Dakar Aug 27, 2012 08:37 AM
I really don't care if they take away his medals or whatever it is he gets for winning the TdF, but if they decide to award them to those he beat, I hope they too are subjected to the same rigorous testing.

I also think that if they can't find a clean winner within the top 3 or 5, that year should get a big fat asterisk indicating the top ranks were too doped up to have an undisputed winner.
 
Mrjinglesusa Aug 31, 2012 02:59 PM
Couple good articles for those who still think Armstrong is some kind of role model and/or didn't dope.

http://www.outsideonline.com/outdoor-adventure/biking/road-biking/My-Life-With-Lance-Armstrong.html

http://www.outsideonline.com/outdoor-adventure/media/books/Keyes-hamilton-the-secret-race.html
 
Shaddim Sep 2, 2012 04:20 PM
We know he did, we just don't care. It's like being told Lawrence Taylor was taking steroids and played while on speed. "Really? I'm shocked, shocked I tell you!"

:D
 
subego Jan 18, 2013 12:26 AM
Well, gee... I was surprised.

Okay, I wasn't.
 
OreoCookie Jan 18, 2013 01:33 AM
Doping and cycling are so closely intertwined that they should just open two leagues: League »Anything Goes« where the athletes can dope to their hearts' content. And League »Amateur« which is strictly controlled. I don't think you can win anything in professional cycling without the help of a few extra chemicals.
 
Doc HM Jan 18, 2013 06:57 AM
The TdF organisers have launched an appeal for anyone who was cycling through France during the summer between 1999 and 2005 as they may have inadvertently won the event.
 
Shaddim Jan 18, 2013 07:09 AM
The whole sport is a cesspool. It may not survive all this.
 
Spheric Harlot Jan 18, 2013 08:45 AM
It has "survived" the Tour de France fiasco, where doping tests decimated the roster of riders — the consequence of that was that a whole slew of TV stations cancelled their contracts. It is, for instance, no longer broadcast live in Germany.

Public interest in cycling sort of died off here, and Armstrong is just the deceitful convicted asshole confirming what we've known for years. He's interesting really mostly insofar as he might actually get what he deserves.
 
mduell Jan 18, 2013 01:09 PM
Quote, Originally Posted by OreoCookie (Post 4212454)
Doping and cycling are so closely intertwined
Isn't that true of all professional sports?
 
olePigeon Jan 18, 2013 03:28 PM
Quote, Originally Posted by mduell (Post 4212515)
Isn't that true of all professional sports?
Except hockey. For some reason, steroids and doping in general isn't wide spread.
 
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:45 PM.

Copyright © 2005-2007 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2016, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.


Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2