Thanks a lot, USADA: Lance Armstrong faces the loss of his seven Tour de France titles

posted at 1:11 pm on August 24, 2012 by Erika Johnsen

And now for something completely different! Well, maybe not completely different — like the many within our festering federal government, this is yet another instance of an unbridled power-tripping bureaucracy run amok — but as a huge cycling fan, this is one of the few sports-related contributions I can make, and the Erika Johnsen Rage Machine is running on all cylinders.

I am all for trying to keep athletics of all sorts clean and drug-free, if the arbiters of the sport so desire (whether or not there’s actually a lot of wisdom in banning supposed performance enhancers is a whole other rich debate, but I won’t go there). It’s a tough job, being the doping police, and trying to keep an even playing field in a world full of ever more innovative doping techniques is a constant battle. Cycling in particular has a long and infamous history of anti-doping crusades — probably because cycling, more than being about hand-eye coordination or other such skills, often comes down to who can simply suffer the longest and the hardest.

There are various international governing bodies that regularly test the riders and enforce doping policies — and again, I’m okay with it. But a years-long, repeatedly meandering witch hunt against a man that never once tested positive on a drug test while active in the sport, borne of stale allegations from vengeful or scapegoating former fellow riders, after a federal grand jury criminal investigation failed to nail him? That is something by which I absolutely cannot abide.

Lance Armstrong has already been retired from professional cycling for a couple years now, but that hasn’t stopped the fishing expedition against him. There are plenty of Europeans who resent him simply for being a stellar American champion (Heh. ‘Murika.), bitter members of the cycling community with axes to grind, and an anti-doping coalition on a mission to prove some stupid trumped-up point. The guy just hasn’t been able to enjoy his retirement. At some point, I’m sure the relentless inquisition starts to take its toll — and last night, Armstrong announced that he would no longer fight the ongoing case against him.

There comes a point in every man’s life when he has to say, “Enough is enough.” For me, that time is now. I have been dealing with claims that I cheated and had an unfair advantage in winning my seven Tours since 1999. Over the past three years, I have been subjected to a two-year federal criminal investigation followed by Travis Tygart’s unconstitutional witch hunt. The toll this has taken on my family, and my work for our foundation and on me leads me to where I am today – finished with this nonsense.

I had hoped that a federal court would stop USADA’s charade. Although the court was sympathetic to my concerns and recognized the many improprieties and deficiencies in USADA’s motives, its conduct, and its process, the court ultimately decided that it could not intervene.

If I thought for one moment that by participating in USADA’s process, I could confront these allegations in a fair setting and – once and for all – put these charges to rest, I would jump at the chance. But I refuse to participate in a process that is so one-sided and unfair. Regardless of what Travis Tygart says, there is zero physical evidence to support his outlandish and heinous claims. The only physical evidence here is the hundreds of controls I have passed with flying colors. I made myself available around the clock and around the world. In-competition. Out of competition. Blood. Urine. Whatever they asked for I provided. What is the point of all this testing if, in the end, USADA will not stand by it?

As Armstrong goes on to say, the USADA (largely funded by your tax dollars, by the way! Yippee!) has been nothing but a bully throughout this entire ludicrous affair. They’ve violated their own 8-year limitation with their 17-year-old charges; the Union Cycliste Internationale and USA Cycling have ordered them to quit their investigation; they’ve done a lot of shady deals with vindictive characters; broken their own rules and willfully operated outside of their jurisdiction; and have obviously made Lance Armstrong into an especial target. Nobody in the cycling world receives more scrutiny than a multi-win Tour de France champion, but once the USADA decided to punish him, they just couldn’t let it go.

U.S. Anti-Doping Agency Chief Executive Travis Tygart said late Thursday he was still waiting to hear directly from Armstrong but added that the cyclist’s decision not to proceed in an arbitration process will leave Armstrong stripped of all of his Tour titles and 2000 Olympic bronze medal and result in a lifetime competition ban. …

Armstrong’s attorneys asked a USADA attorney to turn the matter over to UCI, the international cycling union, but USADA maintains it retains jurisdiction to strip the titles.

Armstrong never tested positive for performance-enhancing use during his decade-plus of Tour races.

I’m not at all sure that the USADA actually has the authority to unilaterally declare that Armstrong is stripped of his titles and banned from pro cycling, but the UCI says they’re going to wait for the detailed case from the USADA before weighing in.

Unforgivable, USADA. Again, I’m all about doping controls, but maybe you guys should think about a cost v. benefit analysis before you absorb everybody’s time and resources with an inquest that’s thin on evidence and ripe with malice. The world of cycling is always looking for ways to bring in a larger American audience to help grow the sport and keep the industry vibrant, and Lance Armstrong has accomplished more for that goal than anyone else — ever.

Armstrong isn’t even one of my personal favorite cyclists, and I don’t actually buy it that he’s quite the squeaky-clean, innocent victim he’s proclaiming himself to be, but I clearly remember watching him on television, struggling up steep summits and whizzing down tricky descents, through the mountains and over the fields, in wind and rain and scorching sun, for three weeks, over seven separate months of July, with nothing but pain and hard-man focus on his face. As far as I’m concerned, he won those Tours. Stripping him of his titles is only going to disenchant potential fans even more and contribute to the stigmas against cycling.

So congratulations, USADA. I hope you’re feeling really great about yourselves and everything you’ve accomplished right now. Really awesome job.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3

davisbr, there were 10 or so people willing to testify against him… do you honestly think they’re all lying?

ninjapirate on August 24, 2012 at 2:02 PM

All they have to say is they think…no one has ever said they know or have seen, it’s all second hand info.

I heard someone say you were a pedophile…I believe 10 people have told me that, they think you are…so I guess you are, right?

right2bright on August 24, 2012 at 2:07 PM

Wrong, he’s a huge liberal.

Why are Republicans defending this Planned Parenthood donor(during the Komen crisis even)… you guys have to be the biggest bunch of goobers to 1) believe him 2) take his side after donating to PP during the Komen brouhaha.

ninjapirate on August 24, 2012 at 1:54 PM

..quite apart from political leanings, this is about someone being hounded by a quasi-imperious body AFTER THE FACT. From Armstrong’s statement:

If I thought for one moment that by participating in USADA’s process, I could confront these allegations in a fair setting and – once and for all – put these charges to rest, I would jump at the chance. But I refuse to participate in a process that is so one-sided and unfair. Regardless of what Travis Tygart says, there is zero physical evidence to support his outlandish and heinous claims. The only physical evidence here is the hundreds of controls I have passed with flying colors. I made myself available around the clock and around the world. In-competition. Out of competition. Blood. Urine. Whatever they asked for I provided. What is the point of all this testing if, in the end, USADA will not stand by it?

From the beginning, however, this investigation has not been about learning the truth or cleaning up cycling, but about punishing me at all costs. I am a retired cyclist, yet USADA has lodged charges over 17 years old despite its own 8-year limitation. As respected organizations such as UCI and USA Cycling have made clear, USADA lacks jurisdiction even to bring these charges. The international bodies governing cycling have ordered USADA to stop, have given notice that no one should participate in USADA’s improper proceedings, and have made it clear the pronouncements by USADA that it has banned people for life or stripped them of their accomplishments are made without authority. And as many others, including USADA’s own arbitrators, have found, there is nothing even remotely fair about its process. USADA has broken the law, turned its back on its own rules, and stiff-armed those who have tried to persuade USADA to honor its obligations. At every turn, USADA has played the role of a bully, threatening everyone in its way and challenging the good faith of anyone who questions its motives or its methods, all at U.S. taxpayers’ expense. For the last two months, USADA has endlessly repeated the mantra that there should be a single set of rules, applicable to all, but they have arrogantly refused to practice what they preach. On top of all that, USADA has allegedly made deals with other riders that circumvent their own rules as long as they said I cheated. Many of those riders continue to race today.

I still do not see how this organization — a subordinate arm of the USOC — has the authority to strip Armstrong of anything except his bronze medal in the 2000 Olympics.

The War Planner on August 24, 2012 at 2:07 PM

More bikes with hidden motors
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Nd13ARuvVE

Iblis on August 24, 2012 at 2:07 PM

davisbr, there were 10 or so people willing to testify against him… do you honestly think they’re all lying?

ninjapirate on August 24, 2012 at 2:02 PM

Did any of those 10 people have any proof? Or were they just going to agree with the prosecutor?

BobMbx on August 24, 2012 at 2:08 PM

Not only he’s a cheater, he’s a moral coward who doesn’t have the courage to take responsibility for his actions. And now he quits to avoid the public shame. Pathetic.

The idea that we should look the other side to spare his fans the emotional pain is laughable.

Any true cycling fan understand Armstrong is emblematic of the worst, most shameful, era of road cycling. This is a cathartic moment for the sport and hopefully we won’t ever have to revisit the dark times that lead to it.

If we should stop fighting cheaters because “it reinforces stigmas against cyclism”, we should give up already.

Read Jon Vaughters article on the NYT:
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/12/opinion/sunday/how-to-get-doping-out-of-sports.html

Hopefully, one day Lance Armstrong can must the moral fortitude to do the same. Until then, shame on him. He deserves no pity.

joana on August 24, 2012 at 2:08 PM

All they have to say is they think…no one has ever said they know or have seen, it’s all second hand info.

I heard someone say you were a pedophile…I believe 10 people have told me that, they think you are…so I guess you are, right?

right2bright on August 24, 2012 at 2:07 PM

Could 9 people post they think that ninjapirate might be a pedophile, so he can be convicted…thanks, after the 9th one, turn yourself in ninja…

right2bright on August 24, 2012 at 2:09 PM

They’ll be going after Michael Phelps next. Already some jerk claims Derek Jeter uses steroids. No one is allowed to be a long-running winner in the People’s Republic of America. Wouldn’t be fair to the others. The original “Rollerball” movie was a bit prophetic.

Like the Big O says, we can’t achieve greatness as an individual…someone must have helped us or we must be cheating. “We didn’t build that by ourselves”….

tnarch on August 24, 2012 at 2:09 PM

Armstrong should stonewall until Romney is elected. Romney actually likes it when Americans win things and set records.

Mr. Arkadin on August 24, 2012 at 2:09 PM

Did any of those 10 people have any proof? Or were they just going to agree with the prosecutor?

BobMbx on August 24, 2012 at 2:08 PM

They were fellow Tour de France USA team members who personally saw Armstrong doping.

AngusMc on August 24, 2012 at 2:10 PM

“But, but, it’s unfair he won all those titles. He should share them with others. This will teach him not to be selfish.”

LizardLips on August 24, 2012 at 2:11 PM

Yeah, there’s no way Armstrong was doping…

http://www.brettluelling.com/post/3435612945/armstrongs-tdf-victories

ninjapirate on August 24, 2012 at 2:12 PM

Here’s a question for everyone:

If he is indeed guilty, should he then have his titles stripped?

Most of you are arguing that he isn’t because the evidence against him is not compelling. But what if it turned out that he had indeed doped, and the evidence for that convincing? Should he then be stripped of his titles for cheating?

Johnny 100 Pesos on August 24, 2012 at 2:12 PM

At this point maybe we should have the “All Steroid” league where you have to dope to play.

Iblis on August 24, 2012 at 2:12 PM

USADA, which exists to make sure sportsmen play by the rules, won’t play by their own. This isn’t merely hypocrisy, it’s proof that USADA has ceased to be an organization that has principles and goals and is instead yet another manifestation of naked ambition and government force, and all three branches of government have shown no interest in oversight or limiting its overreach.

Get rid of it.

Socratease on August 24, 2012 at 2:13 PM

Not only he’s a cheater, he’s a moral coward who doesn’t have the courage to take responsibility for his actions. And now he quits to avoid the public shame. Pathetic.

Hopefully, one day Lance Armstrong can must the moral fortitude to do the same. Until then, shame on him. He deserves no pity.

joana on August 24, 2012 at 2:08 PM

..come back after you’ve been following cycling — particularly the TDF — for about 10 years. They have been crawling up the riders’ rectums 24/7 in an effort to clean up the sport and the event.

When someone wins the event ONE YEAR he is immediately in the limelight and under the most exacting scrutiny. Two tour wind and it’s doubled; afterwards, it’s geometric. The guy was clean throughout all the tests and NO ONE CAME FORWARD — no disgruntled teammates, no team managers, owners, wrenches, nor any officials who said they saw him doping, etc.

So, get your head out, joana.

The War Planner on August 24, 2012 at 2:14 PM

Johnny 100 Pesos on August 24, 2012 at 2:12 PM

If he or anyone else cheated they should suffer the penalty established by the sport. But they have to play by the rules in investigating him too. If they’re going to strip him of his titles, then everything about their investigation has to be above board and by the book.

Iblis on August 24, 2012 at 2:16 PM

They were fellow Tour de France USA team members who personally saw Armstrong doping.

AngusMc on August 24, 2012 at 2:10 PM

And didn’t move to rat him out until now.

They should be banned from the sport forever for not turning over this information as soon as they were aware of it.

Credibility as witnesses: 0

BobMbx on August 24, 2012 at 2:17 PM

I hate to pre-judge but my instincts and knowledge of the sport say the guy (along with EVERYONE ELSE) was using performance enhancing chems…

CorporatePiggy on August 24, 2012 at 1:28 PM

Even if we take it as fact that you are correct, that still adds up to no reason to strip him of his accolades because a). he checked out according to the standards applied to him at the time and b). if the point of fighting the doping is to prevent people from having an unfair advantage, but everyone is on the juice, that means he was actually cycling from a level playing field after all. He still out-biked the entire rest of the planet for basically a decade.

To see an icon besmirched like this (I’m reminded of Joe Jackson) saddens me.

The Schaef on August 24, 2012 at 2:18 PM

[joana on August 24, 2012 at 2:08 PM]

The Joana Inquisition is here.

Dusty on August 24, 2012 at 2:19 PM

Those coming forward to testify are NOT cheats. Read the story.

rrpjr on August 24, 2012 at 1:47 PM

I will have to reread it.

The only names I remember were Landis and Hamilton. Both were suspended for doping previously. And I believe both were caught with tests that Armstrong passed.

Who were you referring to?

OBQuiet on August 24, 2012 at 2:20 PM

To see an icon besmirched like this (I’m reminded of Joe Jackson) saddens me.

The Schaef on August 24, 2012 at 2:18 PM

He could have quit the team before the series started, or at least spilled the beans.

He knew it, he didn’t do anything about it. He gets to swing with the rest of ‘em

BobMbx on August 24, 2012 at 2:20 PM

Wrong, he’s a huge liberal.

That’s a flat lie. I’ve followed his career for more than 10 years. His only known political leanings are to the right. One of the many things I like about him.

kit9 on August 24, 2012 at 2:23 PM

The only names I remember were Landis and Hamilton. Both were suspended for doping previously. And I believe both were caught with tests that Armstrong passed.

Who were you referring to?

OBQuiet on August 24, 2012 at 2:20 PM

Several of Armstrong’s former teammates, including George Hincapie, the rider who was by his side for all of his seven Tour de France victories, agreed to testify in the case against Armstrong and several of his associates, two people close to the investigation said.

Levi Leipheimer, Christian Vande Velde and David Zabriskie were also scheduled to be witnesses for the antidoping agency.

AngusMc on August 24, 2012 at 2:24 PM

Here’s a question for everyone:

If he is indeed guilty, should he then have his titles stripped?

The statute of limitations has run out on this accusation, even if it’s true and provable at some point in the future. Nobody should have to fight accusations his whole life when proof can’t be provided in a timely manner by his accusers.

If he used something the rules didn’t cover, then change the rules for later races. Retroactive prohibitions are never a good idea, it poisons the integrity of justice.

If they find proof later put an asterisk in the record books, change the rules and testing procedures for later races, and move on. The institutions should bear the cost of their own incompetence, not the individuals they have jurisdiction over. Otherwise at some point the institution becomes more of a hindrance to the activity than an aid. USADA is well past that point.

Socratease on August 24, 2012 at 2:24 PM

Every day he was in the yellow jersey he was drug-tested. If he had failed any of the many drug tests administered to him during the course of the Tour de France, the cycling racing season or one of the spot-check off-season tests, I’d be first in line calling for him to be stripped of his titles and labelled a cheat.

This looks like another case of a government agency- and a bureaucrat hungry for power/fame- run amok.

For goodness sake, Armstrong can’t even compete in a triathlon now because of this ridiculous ban…on a retired cyclist. What purpose does it serve to deny him that?

Jay Mac on August 24, 2012 at 2:26 PM

Credibility as witnesses: 0

BobMbx on August 24, 2012 at 2:17 PM

I’ve been trying to ignore the whole mess but seem to remember an article stating that one of the ‘perks’ of several testifying was that they would not be investigated for doping themselves. And this was offered as a condition of testifying against Armstrong.

I don’t know if it is true but if the USADA actually went to suspected cheats and said,”You testify against Lance and we let you walk”, I think extortion and criminal conspiracy charges should be brought.

OBQuiet on August 24, 2012 at 2:27 PM

..come back after you’ve been following cycling — particularly the TDF — for about 10 years. They have been crawling up the riders’ rectums 24/7 in an effort to clean up the sport and the event.

When someone wins the event ONE YEAR he is immediately in the limelight and under the most exacting scrutiny. Two tour wind and it’s doubled; afterwards, it’s geometric. The guy was clean throughout all the tests and NO ONE CAME FORWARD — no disgruntled teammates, no team managers, owners, wrenches, nor any officials who said they saw him doping, etc.

So, get your head out, joana.

The War Planner on August 24, 2012 at 2:14 PM

Hahaha. I was travelling with my parents to the TDF when Roche and Delgado were battling for the yellow. The first stage I saw in person was won by Echave in the Alpe D’Huez; the following day I saw Fignon beating Delgado and Roche at La Plagne. I drove with my mom behind my dad and some friend as they climbed the Tourmalet when I was 10. I did my first partial climb when I was 16. Do you really want to enter a war on road cycling credentials?

I have little patience for the “he never tested positive” argument. Most guys of that era were cheating – and they admit it – and few were caught. Yes, they’ve been making that effort since the Festina scandal. Too late and still a bit too little in my opinion. The peloton is certainly cleaner now – and that’s why everybody rides at much slower paces than 10 years ago. But the fact that riders in the Pharmstrong era didn’t test positive means nothing about their cheating. Join me at the cyclingnews.com forum if you want to discuss this more in-depth.

joana on August 24, 2012 at 2:29 PM

Even if we take it as fact that you are correct, that still adds up to no reason to strip him of his accolades because a). he checked out according to the standards applied to him at the time and b). if the point of fighting the doping is to prevent people from having an unfair advantage, but everyone is on the juice, that means he was actually cycling from a level playing field after all. He still out-biked the entire rest of the planet for basically a decade.

To see an icon besmirched like this (I’m reminded of Joe Jackson) saddens me.

The Schaef on August 24, 2012 at 2:18 PM

Now…this I agree with entirely.

Do I wish cycling was clean? For sure!
Is it? NO.

Lance played the game and he won. 7 tours is not a joke.

I am appalled he is stripped of his 7 tours. With or without drugs it is an awesome achievement and he’s only being held out like this because he’s Lance. They won’t do this for the second and third placers who I am pretty sure were using similar chems.

It’s a show trial.

If we want to get really angry about bad behavior in sports, please explain why Penn State is playing the new season.

CorporatePiggy on August 24, 2012 at 2:29 PM

Who were you referring to?

OBQuiet on August 24, 2012 at 2:20 PM

Several of Armstrong’s former teammates, including George Hincapie, the rider who was by his side for all of his seven Tour de France victories, agreed to testify in the case against Armstrong and several of his associates, two people close to the investigation said.

Hincapie’s word would be especially harmful for Armstrong, considering the two have said they are as close as brothers.

Christian Vande Velde and David Zabriskie were also scheduled to be witnesses for the antidoping agency…riders who also were once a part of Armstrong’s inner circle. Hincapie, Vande Velde and Zabriskie have never tested positive for doping or admitted to any doping.

rrpjr on August 24, 2012 at 2:32 PM

NO ONE CAME FORWARD — no disgruntled teammates, no team managers, owners, wrenches, nor any officials who said they saw him doping, etc.

The War Planner on August 24, 2012 at 2:14 PM

The evidence against him apparently includes a positive test for steroids in 1999, for which he provided a backdated doctor’s prescription after the fact; blood test results from 2009 and 2010 that were consistent with doping; and more than 10 eyewitnesses who would testify that Armstrong used banned blood transfusions, the blood booster EPO, testosterone and other drugs to win the Tour. Reportedly these witnesses include some of Armstrong’s closest teammates, including respected American cyclist George Hincapie.
See,http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/24/sports/cycling/lance-armstrong-ends-fight-against-doping-charges-losing-his-7-tour-de-france-titles.html?ref=sports

Faced with this evidence, Armstrong chose, in essence, to plead “no contest.” You can make up your own mind, but you can’t say they had no evidence against him.

cam2 on August 24, 2012 at 2:34 PM

AngusMc on August 24, 2012 at 2:24 PM

Too many links. Which one is that from?

And I would note that even if the unnamed sources are correct, agreeing to testify is not the same as testifying that he doped.

OBQuiet on August 24, 2012 at 2:34 PM

@ninjapirate on August 24, 2012 at 2:02 PM

davisbr, there were 10 or so people willing to testify against him… do you honestly think they’re all lying?

What I honestly think is that it doesn’t fricking matter. And that I don’t trust anyone in cycling OR the agencies (and especially within this vendetta-ridden pile of crap pseudo-agency) with not having axes to grind. I don’t trust anyone to be on the up-and-up.

Anyone with any knowledge of the history of cycling will agree with Erika’s “…probably because cycling, more than being about hand-eye coordination or other such skills, often comes down to who can simply suffer the longest and the hardest.”

If you’re not a follower of cycling and don’t quite “get it”, think Nascar. There, cheating is assumed: the ostracism is in not cheating well …if you get caught at it, expect the wrath of god to fall on you. For being so stupid as to get caught (not for trying in the first place).

I’ve been a fan (and cyclist) for years. Doping don’t matter. This ain’t the Olympics (hell, the Olympics ain’t the Olympics any more). Assume everyone does it and you wouldn’t be far off the mark. Jeezus. This is a sport where team strategy consists of boxing in an opposing team’s star, of ramming your pump into the other team’s wheels …you’d simply be naive to think the races are only about individual prowess.

And yet …they are. Because they all know, and all participate, it is a “level playing field” …it ultimately is about individual prowess.

You only had to watch those races …my god, the struggles between Ullrich and Armstrong up the Alps – big gear muscle against insane spinning – were epic.

Everyone knows who won. We saw who won.

…and so this whole thing simply reeks of vendetta. And little minded bureaucrats poisoning the well.

Total. Effin’. Bullshit.

davisbr on August 24, 2012 at 2:34 PM

[Johnny 100 Pesos on August 24, 2012 at 2:12 PM]

Of course, based on your construction. That’s the basis for all the investigation, heck it’s the purpose for the various anti-doping rules and fundamental to the concept of fair play.

I suppose you might get a few people that don’t believe that. So they’ve marked themselves.

But that’s not going to be the argument here. The argument is primarily about evidence and all the permutations associated with that evidence. Secondly, it is about limitations on prosecution of the case. Both of these, it seems to me, favor Armstrong, primarily on the evidence but moreso, now, on the latter.

Dusty on August 24, 2012 at 2:34 PM

No positive test results, yet he is stripped of his medals by an organization that has over-stepped its authority. This sounds more like a Kangaroo court verdict.

SC.Charlie on August 24, 2012 at 2:34 PM

WTF do we have a USADA for? Off with its head. How long, O Lord, how long?

J.E. Dyer on August 24, 2012 at 2:35 PM

Sorry have to disagree with Erika here. Armstrong is as dirty as sin, and I’m glad they finally nailed him!
Besides let’s not forget Lance’s Armstrong is also a far left zealot, and a massive tool bag who left his loving wife and family for Sheryl “one tissue of toilet paper” Crow.
And at the height of the Komen vs Planned Parenthood battle his foundation donated $1 million dollars to Planned Parenthood.
Glad they finally nailed the douche!
Raquel Pinkbullet on August 24, 2012 at 1:28 PM

So, because the guy is a douche in his daily life and has a different ideological leaning than you he shouldn’t have a fair trail where he is innocent until proven guilty?

Watch out- somebody will come after you and there will be none to defend you simply because “you think differently” and “love your family” more than they do.

Before throwing the rule of law out the window because someone’s is nit if your liking, think for a moment how the same circuntances would affect you if you were that person. Common sense before feelings my friend.

ptcamn on August 24, 2012 at 2:35 PM

That’s a flat lie. I’ve followed his career for more than 10 years. His only known political leanings are to the right. One of the many things I like about him.

kit9 on August 24, 2012 at 2:23 PM

Maybe you are thinking of a different Lance Armstrong??
From an interview with Armstrong:

I had assumed, because he and Bush were Texans and I’d seen pictures of them laughing and joking in the Oval Office, that Armstrong was a Republican. But he says his politics are “middle to Left”. He is “against mixing up State and Church, not keen on guns, pro women’s right to choose”. And very anti war in Iraq.

AngusMc on August 24, 2012 at 2:36 PM

Anyone who saw Armstrong riding – after he stopped being a mediocre prospect and became the best GT cyclist in the world (“oh, it’s because of the higher cadence”, “technology”) – and thought he was clean simply didn’t know much about cycling. And those disgusting US Postal trains climbing up the Alpes as if they were rolling in Bretagne. The duels with Pantani and Ulrich, sprinting over the Hautacam. Mediocre domestiques like Riis suddenly becoming GC leaders. It was absurd. Everybody knew it was a lie except the casual fans – the cheaters just had the technology and the money on their side.

joana on August 24, 2012 at 2:37 PM

No positive test results
SC.Charlie on August 24, 2012 at 2:34 PM

That’s Armstrong’s claim, but not reality. There are now 3 positive results on his record, 1999, 2009, and 2010.

AngusMc on August 24, 2012 at 2:38 PM

I’m always surprised at the righteous indignation some people exhibit toward various athletes years after the fact. Time & money expended for what – destruction of the guy who supposedly cheated while he was bringing popularity & interest to a sport few in the public gave a rat’s patootie about. Hard to see how cycling benefits.

katiejane on August 24, 2012 at 2:40 PM

It was absurd. Everybody knew it was a lie except the casual fans – the cheaters just had the technology and the money on their side.

joana on August 24, 2012 at 2:37 PM

Yep. If you look back at the leader boards in cycling in the 1990s and early 2000s, almost all of them have been busted for doping. The other few just haven’t gotten caught yet. There was a rash of perfectly healthy cyclists dying in their sleep in the late 1990s due to EPO. Everyone knew the cause at the time, but kept quiet because they were doing it too.

AngusMc on August 24, 2012 at 2:40 PM

That’s Armstrong’s claim, but not reality. There are now 3 positive results on his record, 1999, 2009, and 2010.

[AngusMc on August 24, 2012 at 2:38 PM]

Can you briefly explain those? The 1999, IIRC, was a positive test for, if I can generalize, something that was chalked up to a cream for butt sores.

The 2009 and 2010, I assume were retests of earlier samples. Are there good reasons to accept these tests over the original tests?

Dusty on August 24, 2012 at 2:44 PM

Dear US Fed Gov’t,

Quit f’ing wasting my f’ing money on f’ing stupid meaningless bullcrap.

Sincerely,

Cloture @ HotGas

Cloture on August 24, 2012 at 2:44 PM

joana on August 24, 2012 at 2:29 PM

I think you should be tested for lying…

lovingmyUSA on August 24, 2012 at 2:46 PM

Never failed a drug test and was tested more than any other athlete in history. People who were to testify against him have all been accused of doping and were compelled to testify or risk losing all of their wins. If he passed all the drug tests, how can be be guilty of violating the drug policy? They just can’t stand that he was successful, we can’t have that! Other people would feel bad about themselves.

flytier on August 24, 2012 at 2:47 PM

joana on August 24, 2012 at 2:37 PM

Damn, you can cut and paste fast!

lovingmyUSA on August 24, 2012 at 2:48 PM

ptcamn on August 24, 2012 at 2:35 PM

What aren’t you getting he HAD a chance to present evidence, he is the one who dropped his RIGHT to do so. NOT 1, not 2 BUT 10 of his former teammates have testified against him.

If he is so innocent he could have presented himself at the hearing.

And yes because he is a douche and a leftist I don’t give him the benefit of the doubt. But I am no one, I am just a commenter on a message board NOT a judge. We are not at trial here.

I posted my opinion.

Raquel Pinkbullet on August 24, 2012 at 2:49 PM

Sorry have to disagree with Erika here. Armstrong is as dirty as sin, and I’m glad they finally nailed him!
Besides let’s not forget Lance’s Armstrong is also a far left zealot, and a massive tool bag who left his loving wife and family for Sheryl “one tissue of toilet paper” Crow.
And at the height of the Komen vs Planned Parenthood battle his foundation donated $1 million dollars to Planned Parenthood.
Glad they finally nailed the douche!
Raquel Pinkbullet on August 24, 2012 at 1:28 PM

So, just because a guy is a d-bag in his personal life and has a different ideological leaning than you he shouldn’t have a fair trial or be safe from persecution?

Watch out- who will be there to defend you when you are the person nor liked because “you think differently” or “love your family”?

Before throwing away the rule of law out the window for someone who you dislike, stop to think how it would affect you when you are the disliked one. Common sense over feelings always my friend.

ptcamn on August 24, 2012 at 2:49 PM

I posted my opinion.

Raquel Pinkbullet on August 24, 2012 at 2:49 PM

You are certainly welcome to your opinion, even if it sounds identical to the opinions of leftists decrying Chick-fil-A

lovingmyUSA on August 24, 2012 at 2:51 PM

Before throwing the rule of law out the window because someone’s is nit if your liking, think for a moment how the same circuntances would affect you if you were that person. Common sense before feelings my friend.

ptcamn on August 24, 2012 at 2:35 PM

Are you serious? It’s my opinion. Everyone has an opinion. your hyberhole is over the top, and you act like I am the judge/prosecutor etc in his case or some person involved in his case.

My opinion is worth just as much as the toilet paper Armstrong wipes his ass with. Give me a break.

Raquel Pinkbullet on August 24, 2012 at 2:52 PM

This is entirely circumstantial and emotional but you have to ask – who on earth would give up SEVEN TDF wins?

Sure it is stressful fighting the claims. So is having testicular cancer.

But 1 TDF win is a huge deal.

7 is way beyond a big deal.

Just sayin’

CorporatePiggy on August 24, 2012 at 2:53 PM

You are certainly welcome to your opinion, even if it sounds identical to the opinions of leftists decrying Chick-fil-A

lovingmyUSA on August 24, 2012 at 2:51 PM

Ad hominem is thy name!!!

Raquel Pinkbullet on August 24, 2012 at 2:55 PM

Can you briefly explain those? The 1999, IIRC, was a positive test for, if I can generalize, something that was chalked up to a cream for butt sores.

The 2009 and 2010, I assume were retests of earlier samples. Are there good reasons to accept these tests over the original tests?

Dusty on August 24, 2012 at 2:44 PM

There was a 1999 sample that was retested in 2003. It tested positive for EPO (there was no test for EPO in 1999). Armstrong claimed the lab had spiked his sample on purpose.

The 2009 & 2010 samples could not find a specific drug, but showed abnormal spikes in his hematocrit which are not natural. It could be a designer drug that current tests can’t detect, or a result of transfusions (which can increase athlete endurance and currently cannot be detected if the athlete uses his own stored blood).

AngusMc on August 24, 2012 at 2:55 PM

AngusMc on August 24, 2012 at 2:38 PM

wrong, the 1999 test was validated by a doctor’s prescription and the other two were “consistent” w/ doping, NOT failures. eat a poppy seed bun and you’ll get a stronger reading than “consistent”.

chasdal on August 24, 2012 at 2:56 PM

Besides let’s not forget Lance’s Armstrong is also a far left zealot, and a massive tool bag who left his loving wife and family for Sheryl “one tissue of toilet paper” Crow.
Raquel Pinkbullet on August 24, 2012 at 1:28 PM

How the heck do you know his wife was loving? Were you their marriage counselor? They split up before he hooked up with Crow.
And what does his personal life have to do with this?

Buttercup on August 24, 2012 at 3:02 PM

Guilty until proven innocent.

Over and over and over again…

Spannerhead on August 24, 2012 at 1:15 PM

It’s the leftist/liberal way.

Solaratov on August 24, 2012 at 3:04 PM

wrong, the 1999 test was validated by a doctor’s prescription and the other two were “consistent” w/ doping, NOT failures. eat a poppy seed bun and you’ll get a stronger reading than “consistent”.

chasdal on August 24, 2012 at 2:56 PM

There were two separate 1999 cases. In 1999 he tested positive for steroids then, after saying publicly that he had taken no prescription medicines at all, magically produced the prescription. Teammates have since said that was created afterward and backdated to cover for him.

The second case from 1999 was actually the result of a test performed in 2003, using new tests that had been developed to counter new drugs. That found EPO (not steroids) in Armstrong’s 1999 sample.

AngusMc on August 24, 2012 at 3:06 PM

[AngusMc on August 24, 2012 at 2:55 PM]

Thanks for that.

Dusty on August 24, 2012 at 3:06 PM

They were fellow Tour de France USA team members who personally saw Armstrong doping.

AngusMc on August 24, 2012 at 2:10 PM

okay, angus, think about what you just said. the guy has been accused of doping for over 10 years, he’s passed every test for 10 years, but you want us to believe that as good as he was at hiding it, he’s supposedly telling people about it and he’s doing it out in the open where teammates can see it???

in other words, he has the brains to use a doping method that has avoided detection for over 10 years (while others around him are caught left and right), but he lacks the common sense to not tell people about it (as one of the accusers claimed) or to not do his doping in private so others don’t see him???

as conservatives, we have to remember not to be hypocrites like the libs. if you’re against government abusing it’s power, you can’t just say “oh well, he’s a lib so it’s his own fault”. what this government agency is doing is WRONG!

jetch on August 24, 2012 at 3:07 PM

How the heck do you know his wife was loving? Were you their marriage counselor? They split up before he hooked up with Crow.
And what does his personal life have to do with this?

Buttercup on August 24, 2012 at 3:02 PM

Well maybe I am bias cuz I am female but his wife stood by him went with him to all the dr appts, even was willing to go through a bone marrow transplant for him if she was a match.

But either way I didn’t base my opinion on his personal life.

My favorite athlete of all time is Brett Favre and he aint husband of the year either.

Raquel Pinkbullet on August 24, 2012 at 3:08 PM

The “never failed a drug test” argument is extremely flawed. Drug tests notoriously lag far behind doping programs, so anti-doping agencies only begin to test for a specific drug well after such drug has been utilized for years and already replaced by newer generational forms. Individuals, such as Marion Jones and Tyler Hamilton, pass HUNDREDS of tests for YEARS before finally failing, if they ever do. As Olympic fencer Imke Duplitzer recently said: “only the idiots get caught” doping. Armstrong and his associates, especially Ferrari, were just really good at doping. The sad thing is, even those that replace Armstrong as the winner of the Tour de France, if he does indeed end up being stripped of the titles, are most likely dopers themselves, thus continuing to tarnish the sport and the minority of clean athletes.

voss63 on August 24, 2012 at 3:09 PM

Can you briefly explain those? The 1999, IIRC, was a positive test for, if I can generalize, something that was chalked up to a cream for butt sores.

The 2009 and 2010, I assume were retests of earlier samples. Are there good reasons to accept these tests over the original tests? –
Dusty on August 24, 2012 at 2:44 PM

Well, it looks like we have what amounts to a witch hunt.

SC.Charlie on August 24, 2012 at 3:13 PM

oh please. it’s not a few disguntled fellow riders. it’s pretty much every teammate he’s ever had, plus trainers. he stopped his appeal to keep them all from testifying and letting the full range of witnesses come forward.

and it’s not true that he never failed a drug test. he failed one in 1999 but retroactively got a doctor’s note saying that it was for permissable “therapeutic” use.

DaveO on August 24, 2012 at 3:14 PM

chasdal on August 24, 2012 at 2:56 PM

…eat a poppy seed bun and you’ll get a stronger reading than “consistent”.

That reminds me of a little story from my past.

I was a sys admin for a dental insurance corporation in the late ’90s. (It was a great place, and great people: but the hours were brutal.)

Every Friday the VP would treat the office to bagels & schmeer …and the coffee was the best office copy evah! (They were Middle Eastern – Iranian’s who’d emigrated at the fall of the Shah, actually – and they knew their coffee lol.)

One Friday, late in the afternoon, the VP came into my office and asked me if I’d seen (let’s call him) Jose that morning over bagels, and if I remembered what kind of bagel he’d eaten.

(She knew that Jose and I were friends – “office friends”, you know what I mean – and that I was always, always honest.)

Odd.

But yeah: I recalled he’d had the last poppy seed bagel. I had the last sesame seed bagel (we were both late to the freebie table that morning).

Why?

Well, it turned out Jose had a drug test (he was on probation) around noon, and the test came back positive.

Yeah. Positive test.

Because the poor guy had a poppy seed bagel.

He lost his job over it, too. Sucked. He was a good guy (and the VP knew it too, but she couldn’t sway the PTB decision).

…just a story.

davisbr on August 24, 2012 at 3:17 PM

Sorry have to disagree with Erika here. Armstrong is as dirty as sin, and I’m glad they finally nailed him!

Besides let’s not forget Lance’s Armstrong is also a far left zealot, and a massive tool bag who left his loving wife and family for Sheryl “one tissue of toilet paper” Crow.

And at the height of the Komen vs Planned Parenthood battle his foundation donated $1 million dollars to Planned Parenthood.

Glad they finally nailed the douche!

Raquel Pinkbullet on August 24, 2012 at 1:28 PM

So…you have proof that the over 500 drug tests that he passed were somehow faked? Let’s see it.

You don’t like who he sleeps with? Not your business, chickie.

You don’t approve of who he gives his money to? Neither do I – but it’s his money and what he does with it is his business.

He may, indeed, be a douche…but that isn’t actually against the rules.

Solaratov on August 24, 2012 at 3:20 PM

CorporatePiggy on August 24, 2012 at 1:34 PM

Because enough is enough. He just showed them a finger. The left s/b happy because he didn’t consider money first.

Schadenfreude on August 24, 2012 at 3:21 PM

Of course he was doping.

You-Eh-Vee on August 24, 2012 at 3:22 PM

“As Armstrong goes on to say, the USADA (largely funded by your tax dollars, by the way! Yippee!) has been nothing but a bully throughout this entire ludicrous affair. They’ve violated their own 8-year limitation with their 17-year-old charges…”

I’m not a cycling guy or a follower of the USADA — is the above accurate?

If it is, wouldn’t that mean that a government agency is cheating in the process of attempting to prove an athlete has allegedly cheated?

For those in support of the USADA and condemning Armstrong — and I have no personal affinity or dislike for the man either way — how do you square that?

Why isn’t there also some epic, be-all-end-all, multi-year and multi-witness investigation into the cheating scandal (again, if the above is true) of the USADA???

Dion on August 24, 2012 at 3:24 PM

Individuals, such as Marion Jones and Tyler Hamilton, pass HUNDREDS of tests for YEARS before finally failing, if they ever do.

voss63 on August 24, 2012 at 3:09 PM

Indeed, Marion Jones used the same line to defend herself: I passed hundreds of drug tests, never one failure. Used it right up until the day she confessed to doping.

AngusMc on August 24, 2012 at 3:26 PM

Armstrong dropped his legal action because he faces an organization with unlimited funds, and to keep fighting them would bankrupt him…and they would win by default eventually. The fact is he has never failed one of their drug tests, & all they have are accusations of others.

The sad thing is Armstrong could have been the PR face of a sport that needs better positive media attention / publicity to make it relevant than even professional hockey. The continued ‘witch hunt’ without any proof to back up their efforts continue to make them look pathetic and the entire sport not worth wasting time on.

Don’t know about anyone else, but Lance Armstrong will remain the 7-time Tour De France winner in my book until he tests positive on a drug test or they have his written/oral testimony saying he cheated. SCREW ‘EM!

easyt65 on August 24, 2012 at 3:27 PM

Armstrong? A cheater?

Dang, I haven’t felt like this since I found out the Easter Bunny wasn’t real.

Look, the fact that he would not fight the charges indicates to me an overwhelming consciousness of guilt. As much of a competitor as was Armstrong, I can’t believe he would not take the USADA on if he was innocent.

I didn’t agree with Lance’s politics, and I can’t criticize his lifestyle, but he was damn fun to watch during those seven memorable Julys.

BigAlSouth on August 24, 2012 at 3:28 PM

The original “Rollerball” movie was a bit prophetic.

hadsil on August 24, 2012 at 1:43 PM

We are all Jonathon E, now.

Solaratov on August 24, 2012 at 3:30 PM

AngusMc, ‘YES or NO – have you stopped beating your wife’? Either way you answer, you’re Screwed, appearing as if you have beaten ‘her’ at some point. The agency has done the same thing to Armstrong….there is much speculation, for which he has been officially stripped of his wins. No one has ever PROVEN he did anything wrong, but that doesn’t matter now, does it?

In AMERICA, however, By GOD, we are innocent until PROVEN guilty!

And in another complete train of thought….7-time winner after Cancer…..some things just need to be ‘let go’….ya, know? Armstrong has been such an incredible inspiration to people who have fought off death/cancer because of him. Put a d@mn ‘*’ by his name if you won’t to, but, again, some things need to be let go.

(And I bet if Armstrong was French or Italian, I bet they would not have hounded his @$$ this hard for so long trying to bring him down.)

easyt65 on August 24, 2012 at 3:35 PM

“As Armstrong goes on to say, the USADA (largely funded by your tax dollars, by the way! Yippee!) has been nothing but a bully throughout this entire ludicrous affair. They’ve violated their own 8-year limitation with their 17-year-old charges…”

I’m not a cycling guy or a follower of the USADA — is the above accurate?

The USADA has an 8 year statute of limitations. However, they are also claiming evidence from 2004-2005, 2009, and 2010, which USADA says resets the clock on the statute of limitations since it is the same continuing offense from 1998 to 2010.

AngusMc on August 24, 2012 at 3:35 PM

Too little evidence of any quality, and I understand the claimed evidence that he doped is pretty flimsy. Too late, and too many tests that showed clean. The USADA should let it all go and let Lance keep what he’s got. A ban on future competition, well if something is needed to save face, but no retroactive yankings of medals. (If they are returned, I hope Lance melts them into one big mess so they are completely un-usable and barely recognizable again.)

I know what agency I shall recommend to a President (please, God) Romney to cut in the next budgets.

Kevin K. on August 24, 2012 at 3:35 PM

In AMERICA, however, By GOD, we are innocent until PROVEN guilty!

easyt65 on August 24, 2012 at 3:35 PM

If you plead “no contest” to a charge, you are punished as if you were found guilty. That’s what Armstrong did in this case. He pleaded “no contest” instead of submitting it to a neutral arbitrator for determination.

AngusMc on August 24, 2012 at 3:38 PM

“Look, the fact that he would not fight the charges indicates to me an overwhelming consciousness of guilt. As much of a competitor as was Armstrong, I can’t believe he would not take the USADA on if he was innocent.”

— As I said, the USADA has a lot more money that Armstrong has, & they would keep this fight strung out in court for as long as gthey had to in order to drain Armstrong’s bank account until he was forced to drop the suit. Armstrong knew this & said ‘To H#LL WITH YOU PEOPLE!’ This proves NOTHING to me because they haven’t proven yet Armstrong did anything wrong. Now they NEVER have to.

easyt65 on August 24, 2012 at 3:38 PM

‘No Contest’ still doesn’t equal ‘GUILTY’. The org may have ‘won’, but it is a hollow victory, sorta like kissing your sister, because they NEVER did (& never WILL) prove beyond the shadow of a doubt that Armstrong doped.

easyt65 on August 24, 2012 at 3:41 PM

Too little evidence of any quality, and I understand the claimed evidence that he doped is pretty flimsy.

Kevin K. on August 24, 2012 at 3:35 PM

If there really was no evidence, Armstrong could have won easily by submitting it to the neutral arbitrator, which is the next step in the process.

AngusMc on August 24, 2012 at 3:41 PM

Wrong, he’s a huge liberal…

ninjapirate on August 24, 2012 at 1:54 PM

…well!…then he took drugs!
(:->)

KOOLAID2 on August 24, 2012 at 3:42 PM

— As I said, the USADA has a lot more money that Armstrong has, & they would keep this fight strung out in court

easyt65 on August 24, 2012 at 3:38 PM

What court? The next step was to go to an independent, neutral arbitrator. The only way court entered into the equation was when Armstrong’s lawyers filed a lawsuit to try and stop the investigation.

AngusMc on August 24, 2012 at 3:43 PM

That’s Armstrong’s claim, but not reality. There are now 3 positive results on his record, 1999, 2009, and 2010.

AngusMc on August 24, 2012 at 2:38 PM

One of them from a topical cream that many of the riders use for saddle rash…it was a trace found on the skin not in the blood…that’s the type of “evidence” they have.

Each of the other two were from test previously passed, decades ago, but supposedly, after sitting around in a lab, opened, and reopened, and showed POSSIBLE traces, and only possible traces of a steriod type product, but not identified.

Sorry pal, but you have been so easily manipulated by the press…gee I wonder how Obama ever got elected, who would have voted for him, who would have been so easily convinced by the press…let me guess….

right2bright on August 24, 2012 at 3:45 PM

He’s been figting this for 12 years now. He knows the deck is stacked against him, that it is about a personal vendetta against him, and it will be a kangaroo court. Yet people think him telling them to go to h*** is proof he’s guilty?
Riiiiight.

As for the 1999 samples:

“Also in the mid-2000s, a French newspaper reported that six of Armstrong’s urine samples from the 1999 Tour had tested positive retroactively for the banned blood booster EPO. The strict standards for laboratory testing were not followed on those samples, so nothing ever came of those results.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/25/sports/cycling/antidoping-officials-move-to-wipe-out-armstrongs-titles.html?pagewanted=all

Hard Right on August 24, 2012 at 3:47 PM

One of them from a topical cream that many of the riders use for saddle rash…it was a trace found on the skin not in the blood…that’s the type of “evidence” they have.

Each of the other two were from test previously passed, decades ago, but supposedly, after sitting around in a lab, opened, and reopened, and showed POSSIBLE traces, and only possible traces of a steriod type product, but not identified.

Sorry pal, but you have been so easily manipulated by the press…gee I wonder how Obama ever got elected, who would have voted for him, who would have been so easily convinced by the press…let me guess….

right2bright on August 24, 2012 at 3:45 PM

Interesting that you accuse me of not knowing about the tests when you’ve gotten things wrong in your post.
1. There were two 1999 positives: one was the saddle cream, the other was for EPO
2. The other two tests were from blood samples taken in 2009 and 2010, not from earlier in Armstrong’s career.

AngusMc on August 24, 2012 at 3:48 PM

Please read this article from Forbes:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/richkarlgaard/2012/06/13/lance-armstrong-hero-cheat-and-tragic-figure/

The analysis is careful, and very damning. I agree with an earlier poster who said his wins should not be vacated because he raced in an “enhanced” field of cyclists.

I do wish he would come clean, though.

JurysOut on August 24, 2012 at 3:48 PM

What court? The next step was to go to an independent, neutral arbitrator. The only way court entered into the equation was when Armstrong’s lawyers filed a lawsuit to try and stop the investigation.

AngusMc on August 24, 2012 at 3:43 PM

You have never been to an arbitration, have you?

It’s no different, cost wise, to defend yourself in arbitration as in court…you still have testimony, still have cross, still have your attorney’s, still have expert witnesses, from both sides…that you have to hire to disprove false allegations.
Do you know how much a couple of expert witness doctors take, ones that can take on the staff of the USDA???
Let me guess, oh about $600 per hour plus expenses…seeing as this would be several weeks, put that around $25,000-$50,000 per expert…add a couple of attorneys, who need to prepare, another $100,000, yeah, for maybe another quarter of million he might be able to win…plus the 6 months of prep he would have to do.

Your naivete is quite astounding…

right2bright on August 24, 2012 at 3:51 PM

Tghe problem with consistent with doping doesn’t mean it is doping. Little heads up for this thinking it’s a smoking gun.

Say someone gets a s broken nose by falling face first to the ground. The injury would be consistent with that…or getting punched in the nose.

So even tho the injury would be consistent with getting punched in the nose, it doesn’t mean that was the case.

Hard Right on August 24, 2012 at 3:52 PM

It’s no different, cost wise, to defend yourself in arbitration as in court…you still have testimony, still have cross, still have your attorney’s, still have expert witnesses, from both sides…that you have to hire to disprove false allegations.

Armstrong was willing to spend big money on a lawsuit to block the investigation from proceeding, but not spend a smaller amount on arbitration to defend himself? Seriously?

And yes, arbitration is less expensive than a trial.

AngusMc on August 24, 2012 at 3:55 PM

So as I pointed out above, the claims about the 99 samples are bogus thanks to improper lab procedure.

As for the other two, as I pointed out, it’s hardly a smoking gun.
Plus as we have seen, the USADA isn’t adhering to it’s own rules and standards. Their credibility is zero.

Hard Right on August 24, 2012 at 3:55 PM

Besides let’s not forget Lance’s Armstrong is also a far left zealot, and a massive tool bag who left his loving wife and family for Sheryl “one tissue of toilet paper” Crow.
Raquel Pinkbullet on August 24, 2012 at 1:28 PM

Nice inquisition you’re running there, Torquemada.

Buy Danish on August 24, 2012 at 3:55 PM

AngusMc, he’s tired of fighting a dishonest USADA. After 12 years you would be too.

Hard Right on August 24, 2012 at 3:56 PM

Question.

3 tests out of (roughly) 500? at least one questionable, and if I understand the other two are ‘spikes’ w/o a cause?

What is the failure rate of the tests they use?

The_Livewire on August 24, 2012 at 4:00 PM

I must have missed something. I thought he always tested clean.

Does he represent Big Sports? I know some are against Big Oil, Big Pharma, Big Banks, Big Corporations, but Big Bikes? Maybe others felt bad because he won so many times? Kinda like the Microsoft of athletes?

It’s odd that people who are against Big [insert perceived evil here] are for Big Government.

billrowe on August 24, 2012 at 4:03 PM

Here’s my beef with the USADA – All sports have rules of conduct for their events. By all reports, Lance complied with the rules and passed all of their tests at the time of the events.

Now, years later, by some unknown standard, there is a claim to have “evidence” of doping which has resulted in his victories and efforts being called into question. Some of the evidence seems questionable at best while other may have validity (I haven’t heard both sides), but ALL OF THIS is years after the fact.

I referee a sport (which one doesn’t matter) and I’m certain that if someone went back and reviewed every tape of every game, there would be improper (cheating) game-changing plays that were missed in a fair number of them as well as officiating errors that were made as well. If doping is a form of cheating, so are head-slaps, facemask grabs, holding, and interference in football, handballs in soccer (that’s never changed a match outcome, has it), runner interference, cleats up sides, or spitballs in baseball, etc. You get the point. Are we going to go back to revisit every sport and strip teams of their wins? Where does it end? Where do we decide to stop sanitizing (sports) history to make it morally acceptable to the most faint-hearted or politically-correct?

Thanks for reading.

EdmundBurke247 on August 24, 2012 at 4:03 PM

I do wish he would come clean, though.

JurysOut on August 24, 2012 at 3:48 PM

Ever hear of Dara Torres?

She was dogged by this for years, she just barely missed not making the Olympics this year, a 41 year old swimmer…41 years old.

She won 3 silver medals in 2008, just under 40 years old.

She was so hounded, she volunteered to do a weekly blood test just so her life wouldn’t be so interrupted by “surprise” doctors knocking on her door at any time.

They were never convinced that she was clean because…like your quote from the article insinuated nobody could do what she has done, because no one has done it before…

There are anomaly’s in life.

Ever hear of Bob Beamon? He broke the world record by almost 2 feet in the long jump, when it was broken literally inches at a time since the 1930′s (it took almost 60 years to improve the distance by 2ft.)…25 years later is was broken…but by inches.

Things, great things happen…

right2bright on August 24, 2012 at 4:04 PM

And yes, arbitration is less expensive than a trial.

AngusMc on August 24, 2012 at 3:55 PM

Yeah instead of $500,000 it would only cost him out of pocket $250,000, what a deal…this is the fact jack…if they have proof, have them bring it forward.

In this country, you are innocent until proven guilty…so have them prove it.

But don’t expect someone to pay to prove he is innocent, after spending 12 years proving it, and they could never come up with proof…just allegation, after allegation.

Kind of like me saying you are a pedophile…now spend the money and prove your are not…we will even go to arbitration, after all it’s cheaper than a trial…and just a public.

right2bright on August 24, 2012 at 4:08 PM

He pleaded “no contest” instead of submitting it to a neutral arbitrator for determination.

AngusMc on August 24, 2012 at 3:38 PM

No. He simply said, “No more. I’m not playing your stupid, vindictive game any longer.”
He hasn’t pled ‘no contest’ to anything. Just the opposite, in fact.

Solaratov on August 24, 2012 at 4:11 PM

No. He simply said, “No more. I’m not playing your stupid, vindictive game any longer.”
He hasn’t pled ‘no contest’ to anything. Just the opposite, in fact.

Solaratov on August 24, 2012 at 4:11 PM

When he competed in sanctioned cycling events, he agreed to be bound by the USADA process. He can’t just wave his hands now and say the rules don’t apply to him.

AngusMc on August 24, 2012 at 4:21 PM

Cult of personality much? You whiners defending someone you don’t even know is as bad as the liberals blind love for Obama.

yubley on August 24, 2012 at 4:22 PM

EdmundBurke247 on August 24, 2012 at 4:03 PM

For realz.

dczombie on August 24, 2012 at 4:33 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3