nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

'Enough is Enough' - Lance Armstrong

my friend

Armstrong Drops Fight Against Doping Charges

“There comes a point in every man’s life when he has to say, ‘Enough is enough,’ ” Armstrong said in a statement.

“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.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/24/sports/cycling/lance-armstrong-ends-fight-against-doping-charges-losing-his-7-tour-de-france-titles.html

Lance's decision means he will be stripped of his seven Tour titles, the bronze medal he won at the 2000 Olympics and all other titles, awards and money he won from August 1998 on.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

corny

Is it just me or is the no side gaining ground in the poll? Whats going on?:)

carltonleon

Is Bruyneel still the Director Sportif of Radioshack Nissan ?

wav1

morana wrote: »

what future can the sport have if Dowsett and Cummings are basically pro-doping.

the sport is lost

Morana surely you only mean the ''pro element'' of the sport.?

Cienciano

damoz wrote: »

will i get a refund so ?

i would be willing to have my donation fund some more freelance investigative journalism by PK

If it doesn't go to court it'll be donated to livestrong :pac:

Flandria

carltonleon wrote: »

Is Bruyneel still the Director Sportif of Radioshack Nissan ?

The Belgian federation have sent the USADA analysis to the Federal Prosecutor today

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/belgian-federation-forwards-bruyneel-charges-to-federal-prosecutor

Lumen

Has this been posted?

Surely no coincidence.

Leinders not renewed after Team Sky investigation
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/leinders-not-renewed-after-team-sky-investigation

A P

Last one I promise!

Official poem on behalf of the UCI: www.uci.ch/coveruppoemwithrhymingcouplets

Patrick and Hein would like to state clearly
That doping in cycling has cost the sport dearly

But Lance is a saint and these allegations
Are harming this wonderful man’s reputation

After Festina the sport was destroyed
We urgently needed a new poster boy

Hein and I prayed to the Gods for an answer
The Gods delivered a survivor of cancer

Armstrong appeared like an angel from heaven
We’d never have thought that he would win seven

He used cortisone for a rash on his bum
His TUE was a backdated one

Armstrong was cycling’s source of redemption
So we thought it best to award an exemption

Some of the journos were squawking with horror
But Lance told us it was a genuine error

The dogs in the street woofed that he was dirty
But we were more worried with tripping up Bertie

We all had a chuckle when he raised the steaks
You’d never catch Lance making blood bag mistakes

The UCI has a good explanation
For why we accepted Lance’s donation

He told us to use it for testing equipment
It wasn’t hush money for his latest shipment

Or a payment to help us shove under a rug
A positive test for a blood-boosting drug

Hein and I have done our best for the sport
We’ve introduced the biological passport

The future looks rosy with Wiggins and Froome
They both ride paniagua we have to assume

With doctors like Leinders and team-mates like Barry
No wonder Wiggins is happy as Larry.

To journos with new evidence they plan to bring forth
Start saving up cos we’ll see you in court

We’ll make you apologise in all types of media
From Playboy to Cyclingnews and Wikipedia

The soup has been shat in by 11 apostles
The size of USADA’s report is colossal

In conclusion, the report is a pain in the ass
And we’ll do our best to appeal it to CAS

niceonetom

Well, this is very depressing:
Nothing proven, still a legend, charity work, different era yada yada yada...

ednwireland

Lumen wrote: »

Has this been posted?

Surely no coincidence.

Leinders not renewed after Team Sky investigation
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/leinders-not-renewed-after-team-sky-investigation

ooh thats interesting will sky go through their rosta with a fine tooth comb now

Morrisseeee

RTE audio links.

ThisRegard

niceonetom wrote: »

Well, this is very depressing:
Nothing proven, still a legend, charity work, different era yada yada yada...

The first two guys don't come across as the brightest of sparks anyway.

Chips Lovell

Dowsett is retracting/clarifying on Twitter as we speak:

https://ja.twitter.com/alexdowsett

letape

carltonleon wrote: »

Is Bruyneel still the Director Sportif of Radioshack Nissan ?

Yes!! Still there. I had read that he intended to go to arbitration and not accept the ban handed down by USADA. Not sure what the latest on his poisition is but I don't expect we'll see him behind the wheel as a DS in the future!

Chips Lovell

Yates said he saw nothing untoward:

http://www.velonation.com/News/ID/13045/Armstrong-case-Yates-insists-he-saw-nothing-suspicious-as-rider-or-directeur-sportif.aspx

furiousox

Has Liggett said anything yet?

ratracer

Vladimir Kurtains wrote: »

Dowsett is retracting/clarifying on Twitter as we speak:

https://ja.twitter.com/alexdowsett

This is a new skill, being able to back pedal faster that forward, 'clean' pedalling, its a new era for professional cycling

ThisRegard

Vladimir Kurtains wrote: »

Yates said he saw nothing untoward:

http://www.velonation.com/News/ID/13045/Armstrong-case-Yates-insists-he-saw-nothing-suspicious-as-rider-or-directeur-sportif.aspx

He's either very very naive, or trying to completely distance himself from stuff he knew was going on.

morana

wav1 wrote: »

Morana surely you only mean the ''pro element'' of the sport.?

I do mean just the pro element. Here we have a team of dopers. Ekimov is appointed DS of Astana. Riis still there, Bruyneel the rat, Phil Ligget, David Harmon, Sean yates parks up outside of motomans shop and then to cap it all 2 young riders come out pro lance. They are retracting it now but for me the initial statement has more validity. Brailsford didnt tell them that, they formulated that first response themselves.

dave2pvd

hardCopy wrote: »

....the foundation. They don't fund research....

The foundation seems to exist primarily to benefit Lance Armstrong.

Let me put on my devil's advocate hat for a moment:

So what if they don't fund research? Awareness is incredibly important.

Primarily to benefit LA? No, can't agree. They actually audit pretty favorably on the charity watch .orgs

/devil's advocate

niceonetom

Vladimir Kurtains wrote: »

Yates said he saw nothing untoward:

http://www.velonation.com/News/ID/13045/Armstrong-case-Yates-insists-he-saw-nothing-suspicious-as-rider-or-directeur-sportif.aspx

Suddenly Leinders seems like really small fry. If SKY are to maintain the PR line then firing him and having gobby kids like Dowset publicly 'clarify' their statements to be more in line with the official dogma (!) doesn't seem like enough.

I wonder if they'll just stick to the claim that Yates must be the most oblivious man in the world, or perhaps they'll conduct some sort of internal investigation for our benefit? Hard to know how they should best protect their brand because it could easily crumble if people start comparing Motorolla/USPS to SKY again they way some were doing during the tour.

Clanket

Thought it was funny

Chips Lovell

Brailsford really, really needs to rethink his PR. Because at the moment, the way they're handling things is drawing more flack to the team than they probably deserve.

He could learn a lot from Vaughters.

Flandria

furiousox wrote: »

Has Liggett said anything yet?

No, he is waiting to open the suitcase of courage bo11ocks...

letape

dave2pvd wrote: »

Let me put on my devil's advocate hat for a moment:

So what if they don't front research? Awareness is incredibly important.

Primarily to benefit LA? No, can't agree. They actually audit pretty favorably on the charity watch .orgs

/devil's advocate

I have seen and read reports issued previously by the charity watch organisation and other independent bodies and don't have an issue with the charity. By all accounts the money that is raised is being spent appropriately. They provide awareness, education and support to people that have cancer and these are good things. They also used to fund research but no longer do, on the basis that what they were generating and spending was very small in the context of the global cancer research spend.

Obviously the man himself has benefited through association with the charity... but the charity has thus far benefited through association also.

corny

"Choose someone else's piss".:D Classic

Lusk Doyle

Lots of people involved need to put the shovels aside, stop digging, and realise that the game is:

1. Well and truly up, or
2. Almost up, or
3. May actually never be up but should have new found respect for the "authorities", fans, fellow sports persons, and a realisation that now is the time to be a part of the "new dawn" in pro cycling.

There needs to be both a top down and grassroots up movement. This will require putting egos aside which will probably be the single biggest obstacle of all.

We live in hope.

Funkyzeit

I think the silence of the current peleton (to date) is deafening.

Bar Garmin (presumably led from Vaughters) have any/many high profile riders come out today to welcome USADA's findings?

Top riders such as Wiggins tweeting about non cycling related subjects on one of the most important days in the sports history is depressing.

hardCopy

dave2pvd wrote: »

Let me put on my devil's advocate hat for a moment:

So what if they don't front research? Awareness is incredibly important.

Primarily to benefit LA? No, can't agree. They actually audit pretty favorably on the charity watch .orgs

/devil's advocate

The same site you link criticise their fundraising and marketing methods

The Lance Armstrong Foundation (LAF), founded by the champion bicyclist and cancer survivor of the same name, is celebrating its 10-year anniversary this year. Wouldn’t you think a charity that receives massive publicity for having one of the most popular causes and most admired celebrities as the face of the organization would be able to easily raise lots of money? Unfortunately this is not the case. LAF spent as much as $45 to raise each $100, exceeding AIP’s 35% recommended fundraising ceiling by a significant margin. While LAF had difficulty raising contributions efficiently, it did prove to be a savvy merchandise marketer. LAF sold over $24 million in merchandise, including the ubiquitous yellow “LIVESTRONG” wristband, as well as clothing, sports gear and even dog leashes. Yet after spending $10 million in solicitation costs, the group brought in only $22 million in contributions, according to AIP’s analysis of LAF’s 2005 financial statements.

The original article is missing but here's the google cache: http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:LfOIrDl5p3UJ:www.charitywatch.org/articles/cancer.html+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=ie

There are lots of cancer charities worldwide that don't benefit anyone but sick people, I don't like the way Lance mixes business with charity, and I certainly don't believe it entitles him to any kind of sympathetic treatment. He's dirt, simple as.

Bill Gifford provides a better examination than I could

On the program side, I learned that Livestrong provides an innovative and expanding suite of direct services to help cancer survivors negotiate our Kafkaesque health care system. Beyond that, though, I found a curiously fuzzy mix of cancer-war goals like “survivorship” and “global awareness,” labels that seem to entail plastering the yellow Livestrong logo on everything from T-shirts to medical conferences to soccer stadiums. Much of the foundation’s work ends up buffing the image of one Lance Edward Armstrong, which seems fair—after all, Livestrong wouldn’t exist without him. But Livestrong spends massively on advertising, PR, and “branding,” all of which helps preserve Armstrong’s marketability at a time when he’s under fire. Meanwhile, Armstrong has used the goodwill of his foundation to cut business deals that have enriched him personally, an ethically questionable move.

“It’s a win-win,” says Daniel Borochoff, head of the American Institute of Philanthropy, a watchdog group. “He builds up the foundation, and they build up him.”

hardCopy

Funkyzeit wrote: »

I think the silence of the current peleton (to date) is deafening.

Bar Garmin (presumably led from Vaughters) have any/many high profile riders come out today to welcome USADA's findings?

Top riders such as Wiggins tweeting about non cycling related subjects on one of the most important days in the sports history is depressing.

To paraphrase Kimmage: where is that angry young man?

corny

Funkyzeit wrote: »

Bar Garmin (presumably led from Vaughters) have any/many high profile riders come out today to welcome USADA's findings?

Larsson was forthright.

The Sky boys constantly pushing the 'we've moved on now' angle stinks to to high heaven.