Landis admits doping, points finger at LA - Please read Mod Warning post 1

Beasty

morana wrote: »

Lets use that technology here.

Can we please have this discussion in general terms and not specific to any identifiable individual(s)

If posters continue to make posts implicating specific individuals who have not been proven to have taken drugs, infractions and or bans will be handed out, and posts deleted

morana

Beasty wrote: »

Can we please have this discussion in general terms and not specific to any identifiable individual(s)

If posters continue to make posts implicating specific individuals who have not been proven to have taken drugs, infractions and or bans will be handed out, and posts deleted

Beasty I apologise profusely!!! I hope nobody thinks Lance committed murder and has DNA on any dead bodies and btw I didnt kill anybody yet either...

C3PO

morana wrote: »

I was looking forward to the day when the UCI announced his results were expunged. sadly not to be.....

Like the US Federal Prosecutors they would probably require some real proof ....

morana

RPL1 wrote: »

Like the US Federal Prosecutors they would probably require some real proof ....

I think it would be wrong of me to accuse any (american) person of drug taking in this forum.

They have no proof of the misappropriation of government funds into buying drugs thats all.

I suggest somebody put the coffee on and we all start sniffing it

drogdub

Its not over yet. The feds may have given up, according to Shane Stokes on Twitter media coverage the reason case dropped.

But USADA haven't closed their investigation "look forward to obtaining the information developed during the federal investigation." as per link:

http://www.usada.org/media/statement232012

Now thats fighting talk if ever I heard (read) it

Harrybelafonte

Ugh, sometimes I regret starting this thread. It was inevitably going to be a disappointing result. However, I'll still stand over my dislike for Armstrong, for many reasons, beyond any allegations of doping, but mostly because of his treatment of Filippo Simeoni. He is not someone I would offer up as a role model to my son. A lot of the great cycling names had some bad habits, made mistakes, but their strength of character and attitude always stand to them. The same cannot, for me, be said of Armstrong. Unfortunately, more often than not, the real world is a place where bullying and ungentlemanly behaviour is king in the misunderstanding for many that "winning" at all costs is the key to success. I think Mr Armstrong will most likely finally fade away now, and maybe at last we can get on with concentrating on cleaning up contemporary cycling and leave him in the pile of cyclists who made in it in the most dubious of times for cycling.

Fr D Maugire

I just find it strange that after two years they just dropped the case. Surely they turned up something.

I never really cared if he was prosecuted, just want to see him revealed for the complete sham he is.

I dont really put much faith in the USADA either, if the FEDs cant get it done I highly doubt if anyone else can.

I guess, once again money and lawyers triumphed over justice.

happytramp

Just watched coverage on Sky News. It wasn't really making out that Armstrong was innocent or exonerated in any way. Merely stated that the Feds felt that they could not continue with the case due to coverage in the media? Weird.

drogdub

Fr D Maugire wrote: »

I just find it strange that after two years they just dropped the case. Surely they turned up something.

I never really cared if he was prosecuted, just want to see him revealed for the complete sham he is.

I dont really put much faith in the USADA either, if the FEDs cant get it done I highly doubt if anyone else can.

I guess, once again money and lawyers triumphed over justice.

In fairness the Feds may have felt that the adverse publicity may have led to a successful defense that a fair hearing would be impossible as a jury would be prejudiced. This may have been reflected in the Grand Jury. Remember the Haughey and Harney farce here. USADA don't have the same issue here.

velopeloton

I'm sure more will be revealed over time. It would seem that the investigation was botched from the start, enough leaks took place to ensure that it would not be a fair trial and was unlikely to be successful. That would be reason to drop it. If there was no case to answer that means that Landis, Hamilton Andreu and many others lied to federal agents under oath and would now face charges themselves. I don't think that is the case.

AstraMonti

Or.. LA is too big of a face in US to have him prosecuted... Just saying..

happytramp

I know Paul Kimmage would punch me in the mouth for suggesting this but is there anyway a guilty verdict (no matter how satisfying on a personal level) would do cycling more harm than good at this stage? Or do you think it could have served to act as a final nail in the coffin to the drug culture within the sport?

Fr D Maugire

happytramp wrote: »

I know Paul Kimmage would punch me in the mouth for suggesting this but is there anyway a guilty verdict (no matter how satisfying on a personal level) would do cycling more harm than good at this stage? Or do you think it could have served to act as a final nail in the coffin to the drug culture within the sport?

I dont think the outcome of Armstrong case would have had any major effect on doping itself. Unfortunately it will always exist. Maybe if he was found guilty, a lot more people would be open about talking about doping.

I just think it will be sad if a person who intertwined cancer and cheating so shamelessly to enrich himself and his ego will get away totally free. To think Contador could likely go down Monday and this guy is walking around spotuing the same crap over and over.

furiousox

"Make it go away George.."

Surveyor11

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/04/sports/cycling/federal-prosecutors-drop-lance-armstrong-investigation.html

AstraMonti

RPL1 wrote: »

Why? Is it not possible that, despite all the efforts of the investigators, there was no real evidence against him? While he is a deeply unpleasant personality he was, in my opinion, one of the great athletes of his generation!

That's all the evidence you need right here.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FXPXHK7I1iQ

A dopped up to his eyeballs Pantani vs a clean Armstrong. :rolleyes:

Chips Lovell

Threads merged

Bluefoam

AstraMonti wrote: »

RPL1 wrote: »

Why? Is it not possible that, despite all the efforts of the investigators, there was no real evidence against him? While he is a deeply unpleasant personality he was, in my opinion, one of the great athletes of his generation!

That's all the evidence you need right here.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FXPXHK7I1iQ

A dopped up to his eyeballs Pantani vs a clean Armstrong. :rolleyes:

Your interpretation of the word evidence is somewhat confused...

L'Enfer du Nord

Bluefoam wrote: »

Your interpretation of the word evidence is somewhat confused...

"Afterwards [Armstrong] claimed he gave the stage to Pantani", what a gracless creep! Didn't look like it to me, but who knows.

Leroy42

So the french hace been chasing LA for years, then the feds get involved, yet none have been able to uncover sufficient evidence (sufficient being the important word) that would allow a prosecution.

Yet somehow, all of you guys just 'know' that he doped. Based on what evidence. Circumstantial, certainly, but is that enough to wipe out the achievments of the greatest TdF champion in history (in terms of victories).

Is he a nice person? don't know, only met him at that cycle in the Phenix Park and he certianly seemed perfectly reasonable to me. Is he a egomanic, self centered, and willing to ditch everyone in pursuit of his goals? In all likelyhood, but then that is the same for very many (but not all) great champions. They have to be ruthless, totally focused on their own goals.

At the end of the day he was trying, and succeeding, in winning the greatest cycle race in the world. He was not trying to win person of the year awards.

You don't have to like him, you don't have to admire his achievments (which on face value should be admired) but it would appear that like the moon landings conspiracy theorists no amount of evidence (or non evidence) will ever satisfy them.

Imagine someone accused you of something, and despite nobody being able to give any strong evidence you where labeled as a thief etc. Doesn't seem fair to me.

I am not saying for one second that he didn't dope, but this constant line from people that he is cancer on the sport based on nothing more than their personal dislike of the man seems extreme.

Eamonnator

Well, I am just delighted, that,finally, Lance has been found completely innocent of all charges of Doping.

morana

Eamonnator wrote: »

Well, I am just delighted, that,finally, Lance has been found completely innocent of all charges of Doping.

Thats not quite correct. usada are now chasing him. I recall they have his samples from the tours he has won. Maybe they might retest them now and release the results...lets hope so...

Lumen

Leroy42 wrote: »

Yet somehow, all of you guys just 'know' that he doped. Based on what evidence. Circumstantial, certainly

Circumstantial evidence can be beyond reasonable doubt, strong enough to convict in court. Why do you require a smoking gun for Lance? Because he won the TdF a lot? Because you own a Trek? Because he gives you man-lust?

Leroy42 wrote: »

I am not saying for one second that he didn't dope, but this constant line from people that he is cancer on the sport based on nothing more than their personal dislike of the man seems extreme.

Nope, his behaviour and the alleged doping are two entirely separate issues. Your conflation of them is a strawman.

Beasty

Landis' evidence appeared more than circumstantial. Clearly his credibility was an issue

I find it interesting that the publicity the case has attracted was a factor in deciding not to proceed. I guess that fact that a lot of people were assuming guilt would beg a question as to whether he could have received a fair trial

I'm with morana in hoping they can retest some of his old samples and make the results available (assuming there are no material concerns over the validity of results on such old samples) - the release of such information would certainly make the modding of this thread a lot easier;)

dave2pvd

84 pages later and I have learned this:

His fans call him "Lance". So many people on a first name basis with the guy. Quite remarkable.


After a feed of pancakes (loaded with HGH) and a pot of coffee, I'm watching the news channels here in USofA. The Armstrong story has not gone beyond the ticker that runs across the bottom of the screen. Newt vs Romney vs Paul vs Somotherguy is story 1, 2 and 3. Over on ESPN, the Armstrong story is on their main news rotation, although only for a fleeting minute or so. Superbowl weekend far overshadows some sport where skinny guys pedal bicycles.

Leroy42

Good way to misread a post Lumen,

I am not saying that the two are remotely linked, I was pointing out that people seem to dislike the man and are projecting this to provide some 'evidence' that he doped.

Smoking gun? For such a worldwide superstar, with so many people involved on his teams, so many people chasing him, it would seem that the least people could do was get some hard evidence. At this point all we have is some ex-team mates and convicted dopers claiming they saw him dope. Oh yeah, and ex-team mates wife!

Do I know if he doped or not? Haven't got a clue. I have my own feelings on the subject but since I have no evidence to prove them I see little point in constantly pointing them out.

For people such as Morana and others to come and say it is a terrible day for the sport is crazy. Based on what? What evidence do they have that he doped? If they have it they should reveal it to the relevant authorities, rather than making accusations on this thread.

The basic fact here is that the fed's were investigating LA and the team as a whole for the misappropriation of public funds (through their sponsorship by US Postal) to fund a drug program. Even if they couldn't locate the drugs themselves, surely they followed the money (that was really their interest after all).

So now we are supposed to believe that LA was the most doped cyclist, while at the same time running an empire which anybody who worked for never speaks out against, while also running an elaborate money syphoning operation!!! Remember that it wasn't only the last year or two that he was suspected, right from the start. So anybody working on the team as far back as 1999 knew that providing evidence against him would be significant and propbably financially worthwhile. For a guy that is suppossedly so unlikeable, it seems many people are willing to stay quite on such a subject.

If he was able to do all that, then fair play to him. Not many people could pull that off and still have time to cycle their bikes. If he is found to have doped then I hope they throw the book at him, pull down everything he achieved and expose him for what he did.

Chips Lovell

I think one thing that should be born in mind is that the Federal investigation wasn't into whether he doped or not, but whether he defrauded the government by using sponsorship money to dope along with drug trafficking and money laundering.

On the issue of why he is disliked and whether it is justified, I think for many it is less about whether he was a product of his times or not and more about the thoroughly unpleasant way he went after some people in the sport, in particular people who hadn't even made allegations about him personally but who testified about doping at the time, either through the media or in courts.

Eamonnator

morana wrote: »

Thats not quite correct. usada are now chasing him. I recall they have his samples from the tours he has won. Maybe they might retest them now and release the results...lets hope so...

"Justice delayed is Justice denied"

boege

If there is any fairness in the sport there needs to be a transparent and accepted methods of detection, adjudication and sanction.

Armstrong was not subject to any sanction and if there is a flaw then it is with the lack of transparency in the systems to detect cheating. If Armstrong cheated then to me he is just another cheating cyclists but if he did then it raises bigger questions about the entire running of the sport.

The current delays surrounding Contador display the continued lack of confiction to act with transparency and urgency. Ultimately this is damaging for everyone for once accused the suspicion will remain, reardless of any test results.

In short there is no means to prove ones innocence.

Chips Lovell

Do you think investigations and hearings should be rushed in order to satisfy public curiosity?