USADA files doping charges against Lance

skylla

Glut4 wrote:

skylla wrote:

Full Merckx wrote:

LOL BBC as a source of info. If that's your knowledge base yer a knob.

Can I suggest http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed
Peer reviewed, evidence based practice has always been my preferred source of info rather than PISH from the BBC

Interesting Full Merckx. Have you seen this peer-reviewed paper at all?

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed?term=15774697

Oops.

Not getting involved in your argument but have you seen these responses to the article you posted

http://jap.physiology.org/content/99/4/1628.full.pdf+html

http://jap.physiology.org/content/105/3/1020.full

Uhhmm, that's my point.. never mind!

skylla

Here's a little portrait of Dr Moral in question in the wsj. Rather creepy character.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142 ... 21504.html

timoid.

skylla wrote:

Here's a little portrait of Dr Moral in question in the wsj. Rather creepy character.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142 ... 21504.html

The real story there is that he is also helping track and field, tennis and soccer athletes. Would be great to see people pursued in those "clean" sports for a change.

Also (wihtout trying to exhonerate cycling) why is the USADA only going after cycling when ridculous amounts of illegal substances are used in NFL, NBA, MLB and NHL?

rick_chasey

Timoid. wrote:

skylla wrote:

Here's a little portrait of Dr Moral in question in the wsj. Rather creepy character.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142 ... 21504.html

The real story there is that he is also helping track and field, tennis and soccer athletes. Would be great to see people pursued in those "clean" sports for a change.

Also (wihtout trying to exhonerate cycling) why is the USADA only going after cycling when ridculous amounts of illegal substances are used in NFL, NBA, MLB and NHL?

Easier.

Bird in the hand etc.

alwaystoohot

Its rather like David Millar saying in his book that when they busted the dastardly doctor in Spain the authorities recovered around 100 names of sportsman signed up to this guy's methods from various sports but only the cyclists were prosecuted. Possible... probable or what......?

jibberjim

Timoid. wrote:

Also (wihtout trying to exhonerate cycling) why is the USADA only going after cycling when ridculous amounts of illegal substances are used in NFL, NBA, MLB and NHL?

USADA are only responsible for the olympic sports, so NFL and MLB are completely irrelevant, and as I understand it whilst Basketball and Hockey are OIympic sports, the leagues manage AD efforts for those too and USADA only come into play during actual olympic years - I'm not completely sure how that works, but for actual league usage USADA are not responsible.

Rundfahrt

Timoid. wrote:

skylla wrote:

Here's a little portrait of Dr Moral in question in the wsj. Rather creepy character.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142 ... 21504.html

The real story there is that he is also helping track and field, tennis and soccer athletes. Would be great to see people pursued in those "clean" sports for a change.

Also (wihtout trying to exhonerate cycling) why is the USADA only going after cycling when ridculous amounts of illegal substances are used in NFL, NBA, MLB and NHL?

Money, power and reputation.

You go after sport that can't bite back because it does not have the big money, the power and has a bad reputation. Think about why Puerto stopped with cycling and did not get into football, despite it being made public that footballers were involved.

mididoctors

Timoid. wrote:

skylla wrote:

Here's a little portrait of Dr Moral in question in the wsj. Rather creepy character.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142 ... 21504.html

The real story there is that he is also helping track and field, tennis and soccer athletes. Would be great to see people pursued in those "clean" sports for a change.

Also (wihtout trying to exhonerate cycling) why is the USADA only going after cycling when ridculous amounts of illegal substances are used in NFL, NBA, MLB and NHL?

there is that angle to be sure...but I am sort coming round to the idea who cares about what the other sports are doing, if they are stuck in this "we are not dirty like cycling" mentality then how far have they got to go.

Jez mon

jibberjim wrote:

Timoid. wrote:

Also (wihtout trying to exhonerate cycling) why is the USADA only going after cycling when ridculous amounts of illegal substances are used in NFL, NBA, MLB and NHL?

USADA are only responsible for the olympic sports, so NFL and MLB are completely irrelevant, and as I understand it whilst Basketball and Hockey are OIympic sports, the leagues manage AD efforts for those too and USADA only come into play during actual olympic years - I'm not completely sure how that works, but for actual league usage USADA are not responsible.

Speaking as a hockey fan...

I don't care about doping in the NHL in the same way I do about cycling. I care much more about the fact that some of the most talented players of their generation have been sidelined for long periods due to post concussion symptoms.

I would feel a lot more disappointed if I found out Wigo had doped then if I found out the Red Wings were engaging in systematic team doping.

I think cycling has got to be careful here, everyone's experienced a kid at school who always complained the teachers always picked on them, generally, they weren't being picked on.

dougzz

NFL and MLB are essentially businesses and not sports.

Turfle

MLB's anti-doping policy has certainly gotten better in the last few years, but the NFL still has its head in the sand. MLB has seen at least one major investigation - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitchell_Report_(baseball), and almost all of the big stars from the 80s and 90s have either been officially or unofficially confirmed as PED users.

While MLB, like cycling, isn't perfect, it is actually trying to do something. It's not the NFL.

ddraver

In the interests of fairness and critical faculties... http://www.cyclingnews.com/features/ana ... ls-debated

It's going to be very hard to get Larry himself on the blood manipulation charge I think - perhaps that's USADA has gone for the conspiracy angle?

dougzz

Turfle wrote:

MLB's anti-doping policy has certainly gotten better in the last few years, but the NFL still has its head in the sand. MLB has seen at least one major investigation - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitchell_Report_(baseball), and almost all of the big stars from the 80s and 90s have either been officially or unofficially confirmed as PED users.

While MLB, like cycling, isn't perfect, it is actually trying to do something. It's not the NFL.

http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news?slug=a ... suspension

It might have got better but it's still rubbish. Braun is regarded as a 'great' to the Brewers and they were totally supportive despite that he got off on a technicality.

josame

erm think were in danger of going off topic here, lets keep it to hard core Larry worrying

mfin

First little deadline for the 'defendants' tomorrow isn't it?

mididoctors

9 or 10 days?

PBo

Ask Theresa May!!

davesvord

Interesting quote taken from this link

http://www.opposingviews.com/i/sports/o ... trong-case

Do I think Mr. Tygart has some kind of personal vendetta against Lance? My personal opinion is yes, but I also think actions sometime speak louder than words. The 2012 London Olympic Games are a little more than a month away. Mr. Tygart and his staff are responsible for testing all US athletes headed to the games. However, he has chosen to use the majority of his offices resources investigating whether a retired cyclist doped 16 years ago.

MrTapir

davesvord wrote:

Interesting quote taken from this link

http://www.opposingviews.com/i/sports/o ... trong-case

Do I think Mr. Tygart has some kind of personal vendetta against Lance? My personal opinion is yes, but I also think actions sometime speak louder than words. The 2012 London Olympic Games are a little more than a month away. Mr. Tygart and his staff are responsible for testing all US athletes headed to the games. However, he has chosen to use the majority of his offices resources investigating whether a retired cyclist doped 16 years ago.

They seem to have forgotten all the other people to whom The Letter was addressed. What if the writer has a personal vendetta against Tygart?

mfin

davesvord wrote:

Interesting quote taken from this link

http://www.opposingviews.com/i/sports/o ... trong-case

Do I think Mr. Tygart has some kind of personal vendetta against Lance? My personal opinion is yes, but I also think actions sometime speak louder than words. The 2012 London Olympic Games are a little more than a month away. Mr. Tygart and his staff are responsible for testing all US athletes headed to the games. However, he has chosen to use the majority of his offices resources investigating whether a retired cyclist doped 16 years ago.

The whole article is riddled with typical Lance-ish 'its all vendetta' stuff :roll:

As for the interesting quote, the bit where it says "However, he has chosen to use the majority of his offices resources investigating whether a retired cyclist doped 16 years ago", well, who says they have been using the majority of his offices resources?? ...noone.

But we're supposed to read that and assume 'the majority of USADA' have spent their time solely on LA and USPS over some kind of un-defined time period, and once we've assumed that we're also supposed to find it odd that they do that instead of something preparing the olympic games. (Cos of course, they can't do several things at once).

Aaaaand, then we're supposed to sleepily read past 'investigating whether a retired cyclist doped 16 years ago', cos its all so long ago. Well I thought it some of it was 3 years ago, but they didn't choose to write 3 instead of 16 did they, I wonder why, I was wondering myself if it could be because it might have had 3/16ths of the impact in the sentence?

There were a few interesting bits in the piece apart from the LA PR-ish guff, but 'not-a-lot' (Paul Daniels accent) so the article wouldn't have been very long at all if all the sh*t coloured fluff was taken out.

tremayne

Retired ex-cyclist , 16yrs ago......

The guy is still competing!! (albeit Ironman)

This bust is going to be the drugs bust of the century - and may probably dwarf the Ben Johnson bust.

(of which there are huge similarities - in that Ben was pretty much racing against other dopers anyways)

Note - there was a great article in the paper recently (yes - the Times again) which was connected to a book, I think by Moore. Essence was that Johnson was set up by a friend of Carl Lewis, with some beer spiked with steriods. Funny enough - they used different steroids to the ones Ben was actually using (if the story is true).

Back on topic - this is huge and to talk about 16yrs is just twaddle.

symo

davesvord wrote:

Interesting quote taken from this link

http://www.opposingviews.com/i/sports/o ... trong-case

Do I think Mr. Tygart has some kind of personal vendetta against Lance? My personal opinion is yes, but I also think actions sometime speak louder than words. The 2012 London Olympic Games are a little more than a month away. Mr. Tygart and his staff are responsible for testing all US athletes headed to the games. However, he has chosen to use the majority of his offices resources investigating whether a retired cyclist doped 16 years ago.

BS article. For instance says DOJ dropped the case; err the investigator in charge wasn't even aware of that until the DOJ press conference. Of course there is always the good old never failed a test; apart from the trace of EPO in the 99 sample, the cortosoid (sic) and not forgetting the UCI covering for him as hinted at in the letter.

rick_chasey

In case we are all confused about who's dodgy and who isn't, here's a guide.

Pross

Rick Chasey wrote:

In case we are all confused about who's dodgy and who isn't, here's a guide.

I assume BikingBernie is off the chart?

MrTapir

Rick Chasey wrote:

In case we are all confused about who's dodgy and who isn't, here's a guide.

"And/or in love with cancer" thats brilliant. Was Kimmage a 'massive doper' then? Actually the book i'm reading at the moment (Tour de France by Graeme Fife) is quite disdainful of Kimmage, and calls him something like a self-pitying moaner.

rick_chasey

Pross wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

In case we are all confused about who's dodgy and who isn't, here's a guide.

I assume BikingBernie is off the chart?

Doper innit .

Rundfahrt

As someone who is very familiar with the workings of the USADA I can say that the part about the resources being put into this right before the Olympics is dead on. Keep in mind that this is the organization that let many cut and dry doping cases go so they could pursue Landis to every extent possible. Yes, they let people go who would have been easy to nail because they were putting everything into Landis. In the long run catching big names gets them more money (or keeps the budget cuts at bay) then catching many guilty parties and ensuing the Olympic teams are as clean as possible.

( Please note that this post in no way says anything about the guilt or innocence of Armstrong or Landis and is merely about the comment made in the article about the USADA)

iainf72

Are these the cut and dry cases Flandis mentioned in his book?

If they'd waited until after the Tour / Olympics, everyone would be saying commercial interests won out.

Bruyneel / Ferrari / et al must be loving that it's reported as a Lance issue.

iainf72

http://150wattsofawesome.blogspot.co.uk ... trong.html

Good retort

tailwindhome

Has Lance ever commented on Hincapie's role in the 60 minutes/Grand jury investigation?