Here we go again. LA in faces fresh charges **Mod warning - see post #1**

jinkypolly

Are we approaching the end game?

Lance Armstrong faces fresh doping charges from USADA

http://www.washingtonpost.com/lance-armstrong-faces-fresh-doping-charges-from-usada/2012/06/13/gJQAefnPaV_story.html

By Amy Shipley, Wednesday, June 13, 7:56 PM

The U.S. Anti-Doping Agency brought formal doping charges against former cyclist Lance Armstrong in an action that could cost him his seven Tour de France titles, according to a letter sent to Armstrong and several others Tuesday.

snip, no quoting entire articles CH

Armstrong, who won his last Tour title in 2005, has taken up competition in ironman triathlons, and was scheduled to compete in the Ironman France in Nice on June 24.


Mode Note - repeat of post 28 below

It's OK to discuss the investigation, and the allegations made. It's fine to mention the doubt cast over past performances as a result of the allegations. However it is not permitted to accuse Armstrong of doping or cheating in the absence of any formal decision to that effect

Also, if posters are going to cut and paste diagrams from elsewhere, please state the source

Thanks

Beasty

dermur

These aren't fresh charges per se; USADA were always going to take their own course of action independent of any federal action. With any luck the feds have done the decent thing and handed over all their records to USADA.

The only interesting part here is whether Armstrong sticks by his word not to contest any further charges.

Gipo3

The 2009 and 2010 allegations are fresh charges.

DominoDub

Lance Armstrong Responds to USADA Allegation

AUSTIN, TX -- June 13, 2012 -- I have been notified that USADA, an organization largely funded by taxpayer dollars but governed only by self-written rules, intends to again dredge up discredited allegations dating back more than 16 years to prevent me from competing as a triathlete and try and strip me of the seven Tour de France victories I earned. These are the very same charges and the same witnesses that the Justice Department chose not to pursue after a two-year investigation. These charges are baseless, motivated by spite and advanced through testimony bought and paid for by promises of anonymity and immunity. Although USADA alleges a wide-ranging conspiracy extended over more than 16 years, I am the only athlete it has chosen to charge. USADA’s malice, its methods, its star-chamber practices, and its decision to punish first and adjudicate later all are at odds with our ideals of fairness and fair play.

I have never doped, and, unlike many of my accusers, I have competed as an endurance athlete for 25 years with no spike in performance, passed more than 500 drug tests and never failed one. That USADA ignores this fundamental distinction and charges me instead of the admitted dopers says far more about USADA, its lack of fairness and this vendetta than it does about my guilt or innocence.

http://lancearmstrong.com/news-events/lance-armstrong-responds-to-usada-allegation

drogdub

If 2009 and 2010 included Andy could end up being two time Tour de France Champion

manafana

be nice to at least see his name tarnished, love his high price lawyers too.

hardCopy

So will there be a USADA hearing into this?
Will it be public?
Isn't there a limit as to how far back you can challenge a Tour result?

ThisRegard

I blame the triathletes, he's doing very well in the tri world at the moment so they're getting worried about the status quo being upset.

Cardinal Richelieu

If the charges against him stand who would be the winner of the TdeF for those years?

drogdub

Cardinal Richelieu wrote: »

If the charges against him stand who would be the winner of the TdeF for those years?

As per Bill Strikland:
Jersey inheritors would be: Zulle, Ullrich, Ullrich, Beloki, Ullrich, Kloden, Basso

thedudeinthehat

http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/armstrongcharging0613.pdf



Bruyneel in hot water too!

Lumen

drogdub wrote: »

As per Bill Strikland:
Jersey inheritors would be: Zulle, Ullrich, Ullrich, Beloki, Ullrich, Kloden, Basso

It'll be great to see these riders finally rewarded for racing clean all those years.

Sundy

Never tested positive but hey everyone loves a Lance witch hunt!

Diarmuid

Sundy wrote: »

Never tested positive but hey everyone loves a Lance witch hunt!

Is that you, Eamonn?

tunney

Sundy wrote: »

Never tested positive but hey everyone loves a Lance witch hunt!

that he says, but note he doesn't say "I didn't dope"

niceonetom

I'm glad this is all going to finally be cleared up.



Source - http://www.bicycling.com/sites/default/files/uploads/BI_LANCE.pdf

dermur

Lumen wrote: »

It'll be great to see these riders finally rewarded for racing clean all those years.

http://www.bicycling.com/sites/default/files/uploads/BI_LANCE.pdf

Page three on the above doc gives a fair effort to figure out who deserves what...

Nice one, Niceonetom! Just posted the same doc above...

dermur

I particularly like 2005 where 8th place Cadel Evans is deemed the only worthy winner!

mcgratheoin

hardCopy wrote: »

So will there be a USADA hearing into this?

Armstrong has 10 days to respond to the charges, after which an independent review panel will decide whether or not there is enough evidence to formally charge him. Think of this stage as a grand jury style indictment hearing.

hardCopy wrote: »

Will it be public?

That is at the discretion of the defendant. Michelle de Bruin requested that her CAS hearing be public. It will however be under oath, regardless of whether it's public or not.

hardCopy wrote: »

Isn't there a limit as to how far back you can challenge a Tour result?

No idea, I'm not sure that challenging results is at the forefront of USADA's mind. If found guilty, it would open up a huge can of worms for civil suits though.

niceonetom

How is it that he's banned from triathlon now? Not that I was at all pleased that he was now their problem or anything.

Is that the USADA's doing or ITU or the IronMan governing body or what?

Given that the UCI had to allow Contador to race all the way through his many long appeals (thereby making a farce of so many races) it's good to see the presumption of innocence reigned in a bit in this case. I hate to say it but maybe cycling could learn a thing or two from triathlon in this area. Innocent until proven guilty may be a noble idea but taking it to mean 'permitted to race' until convicted is ridiculous and simply destructive to an already teetering sport.

irishbuzz

tunney wrote: »

Sundy wrote: »

Never tested positive but hey everyone loves a Lance witch hunt!

that he says, but note he doesn't say "I didn't dope"

Not a fanboy here but...

AUSTIN, TX -- June 13, 2012 -- I have been notified that USADA, an organization largely funded by taxpayer dollars but governed only by self-written rules, intends to again dredge up discredited allegations dating back more than 16 years to prevent me from competing as a triathlete and try and strip me of the seven Tour de France victories I earned. These are the very same charges and the same witnesses that the Justice Department chose not to pursue after a two-year investigation. These charges are baseless, motivated by spite and advanced through testimony bought and paid for by promises of anonymity and immunity. Although USADA alleges a wide-ranging conspiracy extended over more than 16 years, I am the only athlete it has chosen to charge. USADA’s malice, its methods, its star-chamber practices, and its decision to punish first and adjudicate later all are at odds with our ideals of fairness and fair play.

I have never doped, and, unlike many of my accusers, I have competed as an endurance athlete for 25 years with no spike in performance, passed more than 500 drug tests and never failed one. That USADA ignores this fundamental distinction and charges me instead of the admitted dopers says far more about USADA, its lack of fairness and this vendetta than it does about my guilt or innocence.

Lumen

niceonetom wrote: »

Innocent until proven guilty may be a noble idea but taking it to mean 'permitted to race' until convicted is ridiculous and simply destructive to an already teetering sport.

Ah, it's not teetering so much now is it? Evans, Wiggo, Voeckler?

Every time I see Basso being solid but unspectacular I feel a little cheered.

mcgratheoin

hardCopy wrote:

Isn't there a limit as to how far back you can challenge a Tour result?

Yes and no (just found this out). WADA has a statute of limitations of 8 years, but USADA ruled that in specific cases this limit could be overturned. Earlier this year a runner was stripped of his results back to 2001.

niceonetom

I think it's teetering in a more financial sense. I suspect viewership, at least in the alglophone world, has shrunk since the lance era. The tour isn't even carried by the main German tv broadcasters any more. Half the teams subsist on the kindness of billionaire oligarchs rather than as profit-making advertising vehicles. Maybe the sport is cleaner (history tells us it's always prudent to wait a few years before trying to find out how clean any one race was) but a clean sport can still shrivel.

What I mean is, to be profitable the sport not only has to be clean, but has to be seen to be clean. And that means being seen (not a given) and also not allowing a minority of dopers to monopolise the media's attention. Contador's doping is a lot more attention-getting than Basso's getting-dropped-because-he's-not-doping-any-more.

Lumen

niceonetom wrote: »

I think it's teetering in a more financial sense. I suspect viewership, at least in the alglophone world, has shrunk since the lance era. The tour isn't even carried by the main German tv broadcasters any more. Half the teams subsist on the kindness of billionaire oligarchs rather than as profit-making advertising vehicles

Yeah, I guess the demise of HTC Columbia proves your point.

Still, billionaire oligarchs FTW.

tunney

None of this is, in fact, true. Armstrong is not banned from triathlons. Not yet. Rather, USADA's 15-page letter, sent to Armstrong's attorneys, laid out its thesis that Armstrong was part of a team-wide conspiracy to dope, and concluded with, "at this time, we are forwarding this matter to a panel of USADA anti-doping review board for its consideration and recommendation as set forth in the USADA protocol."

And, "... if this case proceeds beyond the anti-doping review board USADA will recommend a sanction..."

There is therefore no ban yet. Armstrong is free to compete in triathlon, or cycling, for that matter, assuming the race organizer will allow him into its race. And there's the rub.

"Armstrong is therefore suspended from competing in WTC-owned and licensed races pending further review," wrote the World Triathlon Corporation (WTC) in a statement. This, because, "Our rules, as stated in the WTC Professional Athlete Agreement and Waiver, dictate an athlete is ineligible to compete during an open investigation." WTC owns and produces the Ironman brand of triathlons.

Flandria

LA's withdrawn blood values for 2009...
<snip>

Beasty

It's OK to discuss the investigation, and the allegations made. It's fine to mention the doubt cast over past performances as a result of the allegations. However it is not permitted to accuse Armstrong of doping or cheating in the absence of any formal decision to that effect

Also, if posters are going to cut and paste diagrams from elsewhere, please also state the source

Thanks

Beasty

manafana

HTC pulled out as they had peaked with how much exposer they had gotten from the sport, the sport is probably as big in the UK than it ever has been now thanks to the SKY team.

The never tested postive statement is incorrect, he did fail one test were he got a backdated prescription for that postive. Among other thoughts that a postive was covered up.

Flandria

Beasty wrote: »

It's OK to discuss the investigation, and the allegations made. It's fine to mention the doubt cast over past performances as a result of the allegations. However it is not permitted to accuse Armstrong of doping or cheating in the absence of any formal decision to that effect

Also, if posters are going to cut and paste diagrams from elsewhere, please also state the source

Thanks

Beasty

Why not? The USADA has just accused Armstrong, Bruyneel, two doctors, a trainer, and a partridge in a pear tree of securing, taking and distributing PED's, conspiracy and intimidation. Whose formal decision is required to permit the rest of us to join in?

Beasty

Flandria wrote: »

Why not? The USADA has just accused Armstrong, Bruyneel, two doctors, a trainer, and a partridge in a pear tree of securing, taking and distributing PED's, conspiracy and intimidation. Whose formal decision is required to permit the rest of us to join in?

Any problems with Mod instructions, take it to PM or report the post - do not challenge in thread

dermur

From Men's Journal...

On the ongoing investigation by the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency:
“In my mind, I’m truly done. You can interpret that however you want. But no matter what happens, I’m finished. I’m done fighting. I’ve moved on. If there are other things that arise, I’m not contesting anything. Case closed.”
On the possibility of the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency stripping him of his titles:
“It doesn’t matter anymore. I don’t run around bragging, feeling like I have to be a seven-time Tour de France champion. I worked hard for those, I won seven times, and that’s great. But it’s over.”

Jawgap

on twitter, his choice of hash tag for this line of discussion is

"#unconstitutional"

Maybe what's happening constitutes cruel and unusual punishment.........for us, to have to listen / read about this again.

Lumen

Sources:

http://www.xdtalk.com/forums/xdtalk-chatter-box/182673-conversation-assassin.html

http://www.fox.com/familyguy/

insanity50

They really need to let this rest.

It's disgraceful that he's not allowed compete in the Iron Mans now.

It's always bad for the sport when someone is caught doping, the contador suspension has particularly annoyed me as I am a big fan.

But Lance has never pissed hot; the connections to Johan Bruyneel are suspicious, but I mean how long are they going to continue throwing mud at him when none of it has ever stuck.

Bringing this up again and again is worse for the sport than if they just let it lie.

Lumen

insanity50 wrote: »

Lance has never pissed hot

Lance tested positive for cortisone in 1999. He wasn't sanctioned for it.

AstraMonti

insanity50 wrote: »

Bringing this up again and again is worse for the sport than if they just let it lie.

Or... they should be keeping getting this up until either he talks or the evidence are enough. And I think USADA is not that stupid to steer up this subject without enough evidence.

Oryx

insanity50 wrote: »

They really need to let this rest.

It's disgraceful that he's not allowed compete in the Iron Mans now.

It's always bad for the sport when someone is caught doping, the contador suspension has particularly annoyed me as I am a big fan.

But Lance has never pissed hot; the connections to Johan Bruyneel are suspicious, but I mean how long are they going to continue throwing mud at him when none of it has ever stuck.

Bringing this up again and again is worse for the sport than if they just let it lie.

No, its not. The man has been followed by suspicion and rumour for years. Surely if he is clean, this will clear his name. And if he is not, then he has to take the consequences. To say that the governing bodies should not pursue stuff like this is crazy. What are they supposed to do, let athletes dope and not do anything about it because heck, that would be bad for the sport??

buffalo

insanity50 wrote: »

It's always bad for the sport when someone is caught doping, the contador suspension has particularly annoyed me as I am a big fan.

Are you suggesting that if they don't catch anyone doping, that it'll be good for the spot?

CramCycle

insanity50 wrote: »

But Lance has never pissed hot;

What about the 1999 samples, as a scientist, I'll say they were indicative (not authorative) of a positive result for EPO but further testing would be warranted (which can no longer be done). He did in effect identify himself with his ID number that he handed over in 2000 allowing the magazine to identify his samples.

Surely the USADA would not be bringing this up now without some indication or testamonial that is indicative of something that warrants further investigation.

He may be innocent, he may not, but I can't see how finding out the facts does any harm, I don't get why he is annoyed, if he is innocent, it will come up innocent surely?

insanity50

AstraMonti wrote: »

Or... they should be keeping getting this up until either he talks or the evidence are enough. And I think USADA is not that stupid to steer up this subject without enough evidence.

Reminds me of those white american police back in the fifties who would harass black men to the point that they would confess to crimes they never committed.

Oryx wrote: »

No, its not. The man has been followed by suspicion and rumour for years. Surely if he is clean, this will clear his name. And if he is not, then he has to take the consequences. To say that the governing bodies should not pursue stuff like this is crazy. What are they supposed to do, let athletes dope and not do anything about it because heck, that would be bad for the sport??

Lance has never tested hot. Why chase him like this for years and years?
What purpose does it serve?
His name has been clean for his entire career. His tests have always been clean.

buffalo wrote: »

Are you suggesting that if they don't catch anyone doping, that it'll be good for the spot?

Possibly the most ridiculous inference I've ever seen anyone make.
Do you think it's good for the sport when people get caught pissing hot? it turns off viewers, I've many friends who stopped watching because they can never believe that the person has genuinely won. People doping in general is bad for the sport, people being caught doping turns viewers off. people not getting caught doping is bad for the sport but not bad for the audience because they never come to learn of it and it never sours them on realising a result was dubious.

Jawgap

This is pure speculation on my part but maybe there have been sufficient advances in technology that they can now look at samples submitted in the past and detect what was previously undetectable.

The article suggests that there is no brand new evidence.....

"USADA outlined new allegations against Armstrong, saying it collected blood samples from him in 2009 and 2010 that were “fully consistent with blood ma­nipu­la­tion including EPO use and/or blood transfusions.” "

So perhaps a re-examination of older samples has thrown something up?

No doubt it will play out in the full glare of publicitiy.

insanity50

Lumen wrote: »

Lance tested positive for cortisone in 1999. He wasn't sanctioned for it.

so lance took an anti-inflammatory.
thanks for that information, but I can assure you all the glucocorticoids in the world won't help him climb those mountains.

Jawgap

CramCycle wrote: »

......
He may be innocent, he may not, but I can't see how finding out the facts does any harm, I don't get why he is annoyed, if he is innocent, it will come up innocent surely?

I think with Lance it's always been (and likely always to be) the case of 'not proven' rather than not guilty or innocent:D

buffalo

insanity50 wrote: »

Possibly the most ridiculous inference I've ever seen anyone make.
Do you think it's good for the sport when people get caught pissing hot? it turns off viewers, I've many friends who stopped watching because they can never believe that the person has genuinely won. People doping in general is bad for the sport, people being caught doping turns viewers off. people not getting caught doping is bad for the sport but not bad for the audience because they never come to learn of it and it never sours them on realising a result was dubious.

So do you want something that's good for the sport, or good for the audience? Perhaps you could elaborate on the below.

insanity50 wrote: »

It's always bad for the sport when someone is caught doping, the contador suspension has particularly annoyed me as I am a big fan.

tunney

insanity50 wrote: »

It's always bad for the sport when someone is caught doping, the contador suspension has particularly annoyed me as I am a big fan.

Should read this then http://nyvelocity.com/content/interviews/2012/behind-scenes-contador-cas-hearing-michael-ashenden

Oryx

insanity50 wrote: »

Do you think it's good for the sport when people get caught pissing hot? it turns off viewers, I've many friends who stopped watching because they can never believe that the person has genuinely won. People doping in general is bad for the sport, people being caught doping turns viewers off. people not getting caught doping is bad for the sport but not bad for the audience because they never come to learn of it and it never sours them on realising a result was dubious.

So you really are saying you'd rather we pretend doping isnt there, so dont look for it, we will all be happier in our ignorance, thinking these guys are simply naturally wonderful.

Well, thats one way of dealing with it. I'd rather catch the damn cheats, personally.

Flandria

Lumen wrote: »

Lance tested positive for cortisone in 1999. He wasn't sanctioned for it.

And the hushed EPO positive at TDS 2001 as claimed by Tyler. Followed by a *cough* donation of $125,000 to the UCI to aid the war against drugs...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2011/may/23/lance-armstrong-tyler-hamilton-claims

petethedrummer

insanity50 wrote: »

Reminds me of those white american police back in the fifties who would harass black men to the point that they would confess to crimes they never committed.

That's a very strange comparison. It's so dumb its actually hard to argue. I mean where to start!

Edit: Actually I'll start.
Lance Armstrong is not poor. He is a multi-millionaire. Richer than USADA themselves.
Himself and his familiy are not being threatened with hanging, burning or shooting.
There is a mountain of eye witness testimony against Armstrong, eye witness testimony is not hearsay.

on_the_nickel

It's very simple.

If Armstrong is innocent, he should welcome a thorough investigation to clear his name forever.

If he's not, he deserves everything he gets.

petethedrummer

insanity50 wrote: »

so lance took an anti-inflammatory.
thanks for that information, but I can assure you all the glucocorticoids in the world won't help him climb those mountains.

You're right, it was lorry loads of EPO (according to Landis).