Lance Armstrong gets life ban,loses 7 TDF,confesses he doped

ddraver

Coriander wrote:

ddraver wrote:

Ok, I'm trying to think of a better way to say that illegal drugs are illegal...

However the point is that legally approved drugs to enhance athletic performance is entirely legal in the US - see Body Builders for example...

Think you know precisely what I meant tho dontcha?

D'you mean that in the US using USDA licensed drugs to enhance your sporting performance is not a criminal offence?

Yep - they don't care - they don't recommend it either....

There are a few countries in Europe where doping (in the way we re talking about it) is illegal, but it's very few. Lance is only guilty under sports laws...

frenchfighter

Richmond Racer

David Walsh has just confirmed that the Sunday Times are going after repayment of the £600k they had to lay out in 06

inkyfingers

frenchfighter wrote:

I've been avoiding commenting on this thread, but looking at that photo makes me sad. Putting the doping and his unpleasant personality to one side it's clear that Armstrong was still a special athlete and shone from a young age, i'd love to know how good he really was, or could have been in a world without dope.

I also wonder how much the doping caused him to be such an unpleasant guy, not talking so much about what medical effects might have been, but more about how much the years of lying, press questions and criticism and the required "us against them" mentality might have affected him.

frenchfighter

Yeah I agree with those sentiments and questions.

Kimmage said in his interview that he thinks he was a superb rider but couldn't have won the Tours san dope (or maybe just one - Hamilton's opinion)

Alinshearah

Hey, what happened. Can somebody tell me.

RichN95.

frenchfighter wrote:

Yeah I agree with those sentiments and questions.

Kimmage said in his interview that he thinks he was a superb rider but couldn't have won the Tours san dope (or maybe just one - Hamilton's opinion)

This is the great conundrum - in a clean sport who would have won. For example, Vaughters has claimed that in a clean sport Hincapie would have won more than he did doping in a doped sport.

RichN95.

Alinshearah wrote:

Hey, what happened. Can somebody tell me.

The Toon managed to stop their losing run against Wigan and Andy Carroll managed to slip his handler Kevin Nolan's leash in Dublin, causing havoc.

derbygrimpeur

frenchfighter wrote:

Yeah I agree with those sentiments and questions.

Kimmage said in his interview that he thinks he was a superb rider but couldn't have won the Tours san dope (or maybe just one - Hamilton's opinion)

strange really as he said that Lance had never shown any liklihood of winning the Tour. But he was always riding against doped competitors. It's impossible to say what he might (or might not) have achieved in a world without dope. It's probably safe to assume he wouldn't have won 7 Tours though.

Richmond Racer

Fallout from the USADA report continues in the US. Rick Crawford admits to helping Bottle - (plus another rider who's on a lifetime ban) to dope when he was his coach 00-01.

http://velonews.competitor.com/2012/12/ ... ete_267725

Almost spat out my coffee reading Bottle's quotes at the bottom of the article.

Bit embarrassing for Vaughters. Crawford was working with the Garmin dev squad, Chipotle, just a couple of years ago.

Alinshearah

RichN95 wrote:

Alinshearah wrote:

Hey, what happened. Can somebody tell me.

The Toon managed to stop their losing run against Wigan and Andy Carroll managed to slip his handler Kevin Nolan's leash in Dublin, causing havoc.

can you bring me up to date in Eastenders aswell. Thanks

mercsport

My solitary contribution to the great debate in a while.

I always thought Alfred E Neumann (..what, me worry?..) looked more like Tony Blair than Lance.

deejay

Richmond Racer wrote:

David Walsh has just confirmed that the Sunday Times are going after repayment of the £600k they had to lay out in 06

I look forward to this because the Fraud must have Lied in a Law Court and perjured himself.
Now we might get the Marion & Lancy show.

dennisn

deejay wrote:

Richmond Racer wrote:

David Walsh has just confirmed that the Sunday Times are going after repayment of the £600k they had to lay out in 06

I look forward to this because the Fraud must have Lied in a Law Court and perjured himself.
Now we might get the Marion & Lancy show.

I wasn't paying attention in '06, so let me know if I've got this wrong. The Times says LA is a doper. LA says prove it and sues for slander. The Times couldn't prove it(in a court of law). LA takes the money. I know, overly simple but you get my question? Did LA actually testify, under oath, during this lawsuit? If he did testify I'm betting he only said he never tested positive. Of course there's always the chance he spouted off about something that he shouldn't have. In any case I'm sort of out of the loop on that whole thing. Hence my curiosity. :?

deejay

dennisn wrote:

I wasn't paying attention in '06, so let me know if I've got this wrong. The Times says LA is a doper. LA says prove it and sues for slander. The Tims couldn't prove it(in a court of law). LA takes the money. I know, overly simple but you get my question? Did LA actuallytestify, under oath, during this lawsuit? If he did testify I'm betting he only said he never tested positive. Of cours there's always the chance he spouted off about something that he shouldn't have. In any case I'm sort of out of the loop on that whole thing. Hence my curiosity. :?

I know no more than you, but I keep saying my prayers that something evil will befall him.

Gis the money back, mush.

mercsport

As it crosses my mind, and maybe a bit OT, but has anyone ever determined how it was that André Birotte called off the grand jury investigation into USP (or was it just into Armstrong? I forget..) with all the indications then pointing to a 'guilty as hell' verdict, distantly in the future. There was a bit of a niff in the air about that decision, I also recall Birotte charmlessly refused to explain his reasons, and LA was ever so grateful for having our hero of the hour Novitsky and the hounds called off.

In other words had the rumour-mill speculated that perhaps, Birotte had enjoyed the same relationship with LA as LA -allegedly- had with the UCI? Was Birotte the ultimate arbiter in that case? Is he personally beyond investigation/law?

iainf72

Birotte called it off for political reasons. There was little appetite to go after Armstrong in an election year so a few people were leaned on to make it go away.

dennisn

iainf72 wrote:

Birotte called it off for political reasons. There was little appetite to go after Armstrong in an election year so a few people were leaned on to make it go away.

Bold statement. I'm guessing that this is strictly YOUR idea and what YOU think happened? Do you have any, repeat any evidence of any kind that this is what happened? What you've said amounts to jury tampering and that's a very big deal over here. So once again, do you have ANY evidence at all. You talk as if you do but I have my doubts. I know you like to come on like you know all there is to know about cycling but about something like this you're way out of your league.

iainf72

Dennis, you've lost months ago. You should move on.

But you might want to read this

http://reader.roopstigo.com/view/roopst ... chapter/3/

No, never had a beer with any of them so I can't really judge.

And if you think what Andre did amounts to jury tampering you know less about the American legal system than I know about gun racks

dennisn

iainf72 wrote:

Dennis, you've lost months ago. You should move on.

But you might want to read this

http://reader.roopstigo.com/view/roopst ... chapter/3/

Read it and saw what you, apparently, didn't see. The word speculation. Now I know, to you, that because you read someones idea and SPECULATION on what happened that, for you, the truth has been written. Not so me.

dave_1

frenchfighter wrote:

Yeah I agree with those sentiments and questions.

Kimmage said in his interview that he thinks he was a superb rider but couldn't have won the Tours san dope (or maybe just one - Hamilton's opinion)

Nobody could have won the TDF clean in that era. There is a collective responsibility for lance doping

iainf72

http://www.scribd.com/doc/116284071/Mot ... eal-denied

Lance still worried about what will come out, despite USADA case.

dennisn

iainf72 wrote:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/116284071/Motion-to-Seal-denied

Lance still worried about what will come out, despite USADA case.

I believe the last two sentences say it all. The rest, even after a few re-reads, still reads like lawyer speak and is not easily understood. The constant plea for - In plain English - really seems lost on lawyers. Great find though. All I can say is that the wheels of justice really do grind along very slowly. I'm thinking that a few less lawyers, on both sides, might actually manage to get some sort of resolution to all these issues before the dawn of the next century. That would be nice for all the interested parties and sure cost the taxpayers a whole lot less. Maybe he will be remembered mostly by how much taxpayer money was spent to convict someone of using drugs.

Richmond Racer

Word seems to be that Lance ignored a sub-poena in Landis's whistle-blower lawsuit, and will now have to testify under oath to the Feds.

Eek. Maybe the speculation about him preparing a confession (limited in scope, no doubt) could be correct

Walter White

....

blazing_saddles

CN finally have the update.
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/landis- ... rumbles-on

dave_1

Just read article on ESPN ...Qui Tam cases very often settled out of court
and no comments have been made by DoJ that
it will take up the case. And Floyd would win 30% of triple
the sum of usps sponsorship. Wonder if DoJ
wants to pursue this? I think perhaps not

frenchfighter

No_Ta_Doctor

frenchfighter wrote:

A common misteak.

rick_chasey

No tA Doctor wrote:

A common misteak.

*points towards the door*

Off you go.