# Lance Armstrong folds



## legalskier (Aug 23, 2012)

He ends his fight against doping charges._

*** His decision means he will almost certainly 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. __It also means he will be barred for life from competing, coaching or having any official role with any Olympic sport or other sport that follows the World Anti-Doping Code. ***
_
Full story: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/24/s...arges-losing-his-7-tour-de-france-titles.html


Talk about crashing and burning.
:sad:


----------



## bvibert (Aug 23, 2012)

Wow, I didn't think I'd ever see that..


----------



## riverc0il (Aug 24, 2012)

bvibert said:


> Wow, I didn't think I'd ever see that..


I didn't either. It doesn't appear he admitted anything, though (at least not literally). But for all intensive purposes, I can't imagine a guy like LA giving up the defense of seven TdF titles because he was tired of fighting a falsehood. Not that he had to fight anything, I am sure his lawyer's were taking care of everything at this point. 

It is too bad there wasn't a way he could have came out and admitted it but still kept his titles. This retro active stripping of titles for riders of that era is bogus. They were all doped to the gills at the top level. Going back and awarding jerseys to second-seventh place finishers that were also doping but just were not caught is just dumb. I'd like to see some of these riders pass on the jersey... but I doubt we'll see that. It seems most folks being open about the issue only do so after being caught and vilified.

Armstrong really was the best of the best of his time. I can understand him thinking he didn't "cheat" because he beat pretty much everyone on a level playing field. You either doped or you got dropped. 

That said, it is good to see things are better today.


----------



## JimG. (Aug 24, 2012)

The French have been scheming for years to get rid of Lance. It galls them that he dominated their stupid little bike race for years.

I don't blame him for giving up...who cares if he doped up in a sport known for doping? And do any of these French idiots care that he had to come back from almost certain death from testicular cancer that had spread to his brain and lungs? The guy was as good as dead and his doctors admitted as much. It's a true miracle he survived leave alone came back to dominate his sport.

I'm getting a little sick of sports in general, especially after Skip Bayless accused Derek Jeter of doping the other day.


----------



## Warp Daddy (Aug 24, 2012)

I agree that they probably all doped and frankly whenever $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ are the motivation and the driver for most all professional athletics regardless of the sport one can safely assume that heretofore illegal substances are at play and are WELL masked by those scheming to attain fame , fortune and notoriety. 

The so called  " Purity". Of Professional athletics has long been a myth. --and to that end I add Division One at the so called collegiate level . D I for the most part is a HUGE business and the NCAA is a compromised gatekeeper at best 

So Armstong has made his $$$$$$$$ and frankly at this point the medal and jerseys etc are MOOT 

color me cynical but pro sports are never going to be anything but a  money and the ethics involved are at best SITUATIONAL


----------



## andyzee (Aug 24, 2012)

Warp Daddy said:


> So Armstong has made his $$$$$$$$ and frankly at this point the medal and jerseys etc are MOOT




Agreed, if I were him, I'd do the same, who needs the constant headache of defending yourself.


----------



## kingdom-tele (Aug 24, 2012)

Its always about the money? How about these athletes?

http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/o...nce-article-1.1143083?localLinksEnabled=false

Deifying anyone is absurd.  Being inspired though...


----------



## drjeff (Aug 24, 2012)

I always found it interesting that the main timeframe that LA was accused of doping was before the rise of Alberto Contador, and in all the samples from LA that they've tested, they've never ever been able to find a *VERIFIABLE* positive result whereas with Contador they nabbed him.  Considering that both LA and Contador were the stars of big budget teams, one could presume that they both if they so chose to do had access to some of the best medical physiology and pharmacology minds on earth, and Contadaor couldn't pass the same tests that if LA had doped that his samples did??  So if LA doped (and personally I don't think that he did), the "older" doping techniques were superior and held up to the scrutiny of both the older and newer screening technologies??  Doesn't make sense to me

I think that if as much time, money and research that has gone into trying to come up with a verifiable result that LA doped went into say Cancer Research that we'd of had a cure for ALL types of Cancer now!


----------



## Abubob (Aug 24, 2012)

riverc0il said:


> I'd like to see some of these riders pass on the jersey... but I doubt we'll see that. It seems most folks being open about the issue only do so after being caught and vilified.



+1



JimG. said:


> The guy was as good as dead and his doctors admitted as much. It's a true miracle he survived leave alone came back to dominate his sport.
> I'm getting a little sick of sports in general, especially after Skip Bayless accused Derek Jeter of doping the other day.



word



Warp Daddy said:


> color me cynical but pro sports are never going to be anything but a  money and the ethics involved are at best SITUATIONAL



ditto



drjeff said:


> I think that if as much time, money and research that has gone into trying to come up with a verifiable result that LA doped went into say Cancer Research that we'd of had a cure for ALL types of Cancer now!



like


----------



## thetrailboss (Aug 24, 2012)

The biggest potential losers are the researchers and non-profits who were getting help from his LIVESTRONG charity.  With all of this hoopla, less folks will give money to it or pull money from it.  

Agree with Jim.  The whole thing is stupid and everyone lost here.


----------



## mlctvt (Aug 24, 2012)

What exactly does "stripping" his Tour titles mean anyway. Are they going to give the wins to the 2nd place finishers who by the way have all been caught doping too. 

1999 : Alex Zulle took second.  He has admitted to taking EPO in the past.  
2000 : Jan Ulrich.  Suspended and banned for doping. 
2001 : Jan Ulrich. See 2000 above
2002 : Joseba Beloki.  Implicated in Operation Puerto.
2003 : Jan Ulrich.  See 2000 above.
2004 :  Andréas Kloden.  Accused of blood transfusions in 2006. 
2005 : Ivan Basso.  Admitted to doping in 2007 and was banned for 2 years. 

I agree, what a waste of resources this witch hunt was! The Justice department dropped their criminal charges because there wasn't sufficient "proof" forconviction. Eyewitness testimony especially from others who also doped or who have books to sell is not proof.


----------



## andyzee (Aug 24, 2012)

Good Article here In the end a man has to be happy with himself, screw the rest.


----------



## deadheadskier (Aug 24, 2012)

wonder if he ends up being publicly vilified like the Bonds, Clemens and McGuire's of the baseball world.

I doubt it given, he's got the beating cancer and raising $500M in his corner.  

Perhaps those athletes who have cheated and are publicly scorn should take a lesson from Lance.  If you're going to profit handsomely from cheating, do a massive amount of good with those profits and people will tend to look beyond the cheating.


----------



## Abubob (Aug 24, 2012)

thetrailboss said:


> The biggest potential losers are the researchers and non-profits who were getting help from his LIVESTRONG charity.  With all of this hoopla, less folks will give money to it or pull money from it.
> 
> Agree with Jim.  The whole thing is stupid and everyone lost here.





deadheadskier said:


> wonder if he ends up being publicly vilified like the Bonds, Clemens and McGuire's of the baseball world.
> 
> I doubt it given, he's got the beating cancer and raising $500M in his corner.
> 
> Perhaps those athletes who have cheated and are publicly scorn should take a lesson from Lance.  If you're going to profit handsomely from cheating, do a massive amount of good with those profits and people will tend to look beyond the cheating.



According to the article andyzee posted Nike is standing behind Lance. And based on the tenor of this forum and the Yahoo article I doubt his reputation is much harmed by all this but is probably strengthened.


----------



## wa-loaf (Aug 24, 2012)

deadheadskier said:


> wonder if he ends up being publicly vilified like the Bonds, Clemens and McGuire's of the baseball world.
> 
> I doubt it given, he's got the beating cancer and raising $500M in his corner.
> 
> Perhaps those athletes who have cheated and are publicly scorn should take a lesson from Lance.  If you're going to profit handsomely from cheating, do a massive amount of good with those profits and people will tend to look beyond the cheating.




Nike says they are sticking with him.

I think he just figured "fuck you", you can take that stuff away on paper, but you can't take me down and I don't need you.


----------



## riverc0il (Aug 24, 2012)

drjeff said:


> I always found it interesting that the main timeframe that LA was accused of doping was before the rise of Alberto Contador, and in all the samples from LA that they've tested, they've never ever been able to find a *VERIFIABLE* positive result whereas with Contador they nabbed him.  Considering that both LA and Contador were the stars of big budget teams, one could presume that they both if they so chose to do had access to some of the best medical physiology and pharmacology minds on earth, and Contadaor couldn't pass the same tests that if LA had doped that his samples did??  So if LA doped (and personally I don't think that he did), the "older" doping techniques were superior and held up to the scrutiny of both the older and newer screening technologies??  Doesn't make sense to me
> 
> I think that if as much time, money and research that has gone into trying to come up with a verifiable result that LA doped went into say Cancer Research that we'd of had a cure for ALL types of Cancer now!


drjeff, your thoughts assume the testing remained the same. Testing wasn't as tough in the LA days and they got Contador very recently and on some non-typical stuff. From what I understand, there were systematic ways to beat the tests in the US Postal days. Studies show pro riders are significantly slower up the major tour climbs now compared to back then. You gotta compare apples to apples if you are going to compare testing. Can't wait to get Hamilton's new book, seems like he is going to speak to the exact methods the team used to beat the tests.


----------



## riverc0il (Aug 24, 2012)

thetrailboss said:


> The biggest potential losers are the researchers and non-profits who were getting help from his LIVESTRONG charity.  With all of this hoopla, less folks will give money to it or pull money from it.
> 
> Agree with Jim.  The whole thing is stupid and everyone lost here.


Livestrong doesn't really donate to research. They promote fighting cancer but aren't giving much if any money to seeking out a cure. Personally, I wouldn't mind seeing Livestrong tank and money go directly to the actual research instead of supporting a feel good awareness organization.


----------



## riverc0il (Aug 24, 2012)

deadheadskier said:


> wonder if he ends up being publicly vilified like the Bonds, Clemens and McGuire's of the baseball world.
> 
> I doubt it given, he's got the beating cancer and raising $500M in his corner.
> 
> Perhaps those athletes who have cheated and are publicly scorn should take a lesson from Lance.  If you're going to profit handsomely from cheating, do a massive amount of good with those profits and people will tend to look beyond the cheating.


I don't think LA should face the same scorn as Bonds and McGuire. These guys made their name breaking records that probably wouldn't have been done without the PEDs. For LA, it is irrelevant. He was still the best cyclist of his generation and one of the best ever. All the top pros were doped so he really beat the best fair and square (in the sense that everyone was doped, so it was equal). I guess he could be scorned like Clemens for trying to dodge the heat and plead innocent. I give the guy some credit for giving up the fight.... BUT:

I've been thinking about LA's decision and it really is a good tactical move. If he went to trial, there was a really good chance he would have lost. With a verdict, it would have looked much more official. Now he can claim to take the high road, "turn the page", and maintain his innocence without a verdict to the contrary weighing over his head. He also has his supporters like drjeff that will continue to refuse to see reality because it is such a massively feel good story that someone so close to sure death could not only come back but be the best TdF rider ever.


----------



## Nick (Aug 24, 2012)

Do you guys think even if he was doping his accomplishments are trivial? Is the performance edge gained truly that significant?


----------



## JimG. (Aug 24, 2012)

wa-loaf said:


> Nike says they are sticking with him.
> 
> I think he just figured "fuck you", you can take that stuff away on paper, but you can't take me down and I don't need you.



Good for him.


----------



## drjeff (Aug 25, 2012)

riverc0il said:


> drjeff, your thoughts assume the testing remained the same. Testing wasn't as tough in the LA days and they got Contador very recently and on some non-typical stuff. From what I understand, there were systematic ways to beat the tests in the US Postal days. Studies show pro riders are significantly slower up the major tour climbs now compared to back then. You gotta compare apples to apples if you are going to compare testing. Can't wait to get Hamilton's new book, seems like he is going to speak to the exact methods the team used to beat the tests.



The thing is is that many of the blood samples taken from LA from back during his early tour wins (and later tour wins) we're retested (they had his excess blood from the samples frozen purposely for new testing at a later date) did pass not only the tests given at the time they were taken, but also the newer, more advanced and stringent tests years later. Blood doping testing wise, LA has passed over 500 tests over his career and never failed one.


----------



## madman (Aug 25, 2012)

JimG. said:


> The French have been scheming for years to get rid of Lance. It galls them that he dominated their stupid little bike race for years.
> 
> I don't blame him for giving up...who cares if he doped up in a sport known for doping? And do any of these French idiots care that he had to come back from almost certain death from testicular cancer that had spread to his brain and lungs? The guy was as good as dead and his doctors admitted as much. It's a true miracle he survived leave alone came back to dominate his sport.
> 
> I'm getting a little sick of sports in general, especially after Skip Bayless accused Derek Jeter of doping the other day.



Wow! The French? This is a witch hunt by the USADA. Lance Armstrong has never failed a Drug Test PERIOD. This is like your boss coming to you and telling you your fired because someone said they saw you smoke Pot 12 yrs. ago. Oh and by the way we want our profit sharing back. The French? Wow!


----------



## andyzee (Aug 25, 2012)

OK, here's the thing. LA never tested positive, correct? If that is the case, what is there for him to defend? Hearsay? He's getting on with his life, everyone else should do the same


----------



## riverc0il (Aug 26, 2012)

drjeff said:


> Blood doping testing wise, LA has passed over 500 tests over his career and never failed one.


Yea, he loves to say that line. The thing is... just because you pass a test doesn't make you clean. Look at how many guys that were doping kept passing tests but only one fail took them down. Testing wasn't as good either in LA's day. The Bio Passport program wasn't installed by the UCI until 2008 (all of Lance's TdF's came before this program). That program is much better than individual testing since it will account for variances over a period of time rather than isolating individual spikes against a broad and known standard. It was easier to "beat" tests pre-passport because you could control how much dope was introduced against a standard. Saying Lance never tested positive is akin to saying Lance always kept is doping just below the threshold of testing positive. Not testing positive does not mean a rider is not doping, it means that the rider may or may not be doping and if they are doping, they are good at not using an excessive amount. The problem with the old tests is that they measure against a standard high value. But since every person has different biology, the standard needs to be high to account for all non-doped riders. The Bio Passport makes more sense since it measures the individual against themselves over time.


----------



## Puck it (Aug 26, 2012)

Who F$&@ing cares!  We are wasting a lot of money on this crap.  Let them dope and pay the consequences especially when they are pros.  The government wasted so much money and time with the baseball doping. Why were they even involved?


----------



## JimG. (Aug 26, 2012)

madman said:


> Wow! The French? This is a witch hunt by the USADA. Lance Armstrong has never failed a Drug Test PERIOD. This is like your boss coming to you and telling you your fired because someone said they saw you smoke Pot 12 yrs. ago. Oh and by the way we want our profit sharing back. The French? Wow!



Well, it kind of stirred things up a little. 

You have to admit they've been pretty gung ho about proving he was doping ever since his 3rd or 4th win. I don't fathom who they are going to declare the winners of those vacated wins. Seems pointless to me.


----------



## RootDKJ (Aug 26, 2012)

He still beat cancer, and nobody can ever take that win away from him.


----------



## andyzee (Aug 26, 2012)

Anyone care about the other Armstrong in the news? http://www.space.com/17305-neil-armstrong-dies-astronauts-mourn-twitter.html


----------



## Warp Daddy (Aug 26, 2012)

Really !


----------



## Nick (Aug 26, 2012)

andyzee said:


> Anyone care about the other Armstrong in the news? http://www.space.com/17305-neil-armstrong-dies-astronauts-mourn-twitter.html



Neil Young?

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2


----------



## crank (Aug 27, 2012)

EPO is the cyclists doping drug of choice.  It allows the blood to carry more oxygen and, my understanding is it does not show up in drug tests.  The testing for EPO is based on hematocrit  levels of red blood cells...so cyclists and their doctors take blood and dope it to the top edge of acceptable levels of red blood cells and then transfuse it back into their bodies.  I believe a cyclist died from his blood basically being too thick for his heart to pump.

Lance, IMO changed cycling for the worst because he concentrated so completely on the TDF.  It really changed the way other cyclists and teams looked at their season and hurt many other races, most notably the Giro D'Italia

I am not a big fan of LA and am glad he has admitted doping.  I do agree that government should not be wasting time and money in these investigations and feel the exact same way about congress looking into doping in baseball.


----------



## andyzee (Aug 27, 2012)

crank said:


> I am not a big fan of LA and am glad he has admitted doping.



When did he admit doping.


----------



## crank (Aug 27, 2012)

lol.  Technically I guess he did not but by not fighting it and the amount of former team mates and associates they had lined up to testify against him this is as much of an admission of guilt as he is likely to spit out, “There comes a point in every man’s life when he has to say, ‘Enough is enough,’ ” Armstrong said in a statement. “For me, that time is now.”


----------



## andyzee (Aug 27, 2012)

crank said:


> lol.  Technically I guess he did not but by not fighting it and the amount of former team mates and associates they had lined up to testify against him this is as much of an admission of guilt as he is likely to spit out, “There comes a point in every man’s life when he has to say, ‘Enough is enough,’ ” Armstrong said in a statement. “For me, that time is now.”



Why do you feel he needs to fight it? Why do you think it really matters to him to the point where he has to fight constant unproven allegations? He know what he did, he know what he has or hasn't accomplished, in my book, that's all that matters.


----------



## crank (Aug 27, 2012)

andyzee said:


> Why do you feel he needs to fight it? Why do you think it really matters to him to the point where he has to fight constant unproven allegations? He know what he did, he know what he has or hasn't accomplished, in my book, that's all that matters.




I don't feel he needs to fight it.  I think that he is being a realist.  I think that he is guilty.  I think that his decision to not fight it is a defacto admission of guilt...a sort of nolo contender plea.  If you feel otherwise I am fine with that.  It sounds to me like you are saying the end justifies the means though and I do not agree with that.


----------



## andyzee (Aug 27, 2012)

No, I'm not saying the ends justifies the means, far from it. I'm just saying I see no reason for him to constantly fight something that at this point, doesn't warrant the fight. With regards to you believing he was doping, what do you think his competitors were doing?


----------



## riverc0il (Aug 27, 2012)

crank said:


> Lance, IMO changed cycling for the worst because he concentrated so completely on the TDF.  It really changed the way other cyclists and teams looked at their season and hurt many other races, most notably the Giro D'Italia


Interestingly enough, the TdF was a snooze this year and worst of the tours. Giro was good. But the Vuelta is epic right now. I didn't follow cycling back in the Lance days, but give Sky a few more years and I think we might see the Giro and Vuelta get better and better.


----------



## crank (Aug 28, 2012)

andyzee said:


> No, I'm not saying the ends justifies the means, far from it. I'm just saying I see no reason for him to constantly fight something that at this point, doesn't warrant the fight. With regards to you believing he was doping, what do you think his competitors were doing?


\
Doping of course:sad:


----------



## crank (Aug 28, 2012)

riverc0il said:


> Interestingly enough, the TdF was a snooze this year and worst of the tours. Giro was good. But the Vuelta is epic right now. I didn't follow cycling back in the Lance days, but give Sky a few more years and I think we might see the Giro and Vuelta get better and better.



I used to follow cycling pre LA and during his reign and he started a trend of top riders skipping the Giro to train exclusively for TDF.  Before that the Giro was more of a tune up race and training /testing ground for TDF.  Glad to hear they are both coming back.  Vuelta is a grueling race...but they all are aren't they?


----------



## mattm59 (Aug 29, 2012)

I love  how innocent 'til proven guilty  has changed to guilty due to heresy. Still trying to figure out what barbiturates the usada must be on to be so late to the guillotine. 
Can't stand watching the sport anymore. Screw the committees and their witch hunts, let them race. Lance was smart to drop it. You can't beat intellect into a...umm...mentally challenged...group of bitter dipshits.


----------



## riverc0il (Aug 31, 2012)

Can't wait to read Hamilton's book. My pre-order just got bumped up as they pushed the release date up to this coming week. Sweet.

http://www.outsideonline.com/outdoo...Keyes-hamilton-the-secret-race.html?168178276

The article lacks a critical aspect (perhaps due to the fact that an Outside contributing editor is co-author with Hamilton) so don't read this expecting an unbiased review of the book. But the facts from the book included seem pretty damning. Of course, the Armstrong camp will just say that Hamilton is trying to cash in and is lieing to make money now that he is outside the sport. But this article claims that the co-author corroborated the details with almost a dozen former Armstrong team mates. 

I think it certainly says something that Hamilton speaks towards how he beat the tests himself. He only got caught once but it was enough, right? That means he doped all those years and didn't get caught. Certainly calls into question the whole Armstrong line about passing so many tests (except the one unofficially failed...).


----------



## deadheadskier (Sep 1, 2012)

riverc0il said:


> I don't think LA should face the same scorn as Bonds and McGuire. These guys made their name breaking records that probably wouldn't have been done without the PEDs. For LA, it is irrelevant. He was still the best cyclist of his generation and one of the best ever.





riverc0il said:


> Can't wait to read Hamilton's book. My pre-order just got bumped up as they pushed the release date up to this coming week. Sweet.
> 
> http://www.outsideonline.com/outdoo...Keyes-hamilton-the-secret-race.html?168178276
> 
> ...



Riv, correct me if I'm wrong, but it would appear that you want Lance to be proven guilty.  That's fine, but I don't understand why you want that proof when you don't scorn his "cheating".

Regarding the baseball comparison and how what they did is worse than what Lance did because Lance was the best cyclist of his generation and one of the best ever; that argument works with McGuire, but certainly not Bonds.  FTR, I think Barry Bonds is one of the bigger aholes to ever be a professional athlete.  That said, take away him bulking up on drugs and breaking home run records late in his career, he's definitely on par with Lance as being the best of his generation and one of the best ever.  

Taking the drugs out of the equation or ignoring them because so many greats have used them, I think Barry Bonds and Ken Griffey Jr are the two greatest position baseball players of my lifetime.  For perspective, I was born in 75.  There were plenty of old time greats like Yaz finishing out their career when I was a wee lad, but since 1985 or so, I can't think of any players that match those two; except for maybe Arod as painful as that is to say.


----------



## riverc0il (Sep 1, 2012)

DHS... I think it is best for pro cycling that all the dirty laundry is aired, people admit what happened, and that way it can be put to bed and things can progress. Until that happens, this stuff is just going to keep lingering casting a shadow. I wouldn't say that I "want Lance to be proven guilty". To me the guilt is self evident. I don't scorn his "cheating" as you quoted because it was par for the course for everyone. I only care that he is a road block in closing the book and moving forward... and I hate to see the wool pulled over so many people's eyes. 

Any one interested in this story is a rubber necker watching a train wreck in slow motion. You know you snidely remark that others are lame for doing it but you just can't help yourself. 

Interesting parallel between Maguire/Sosa race and Lance... both PED driven superstar performances that drove interest in an activity later shunned as a slow motion train wreck happened... people gradually coming around and admitting to themselves that they were duped but they were happy to be duped because it was so fun to watch.

My only dog in this is meta. I am almost more interested in people's reactions and evolving opinions than the truth itself... because the truth -- in the historical sense -- is ultimately meaningless. Lance was the best cyclist of an age of cyclists that were the most doped ever. Let's get it all out and look at ways to clean it up and move on.  But how different people have such divergent views based on the same information and how those views change, pretty interesting stuff (and I am of course part of that dynamic while being fascinated by it, hardly an impartial observer).


----------



## JimG. (Sep 1, 2012)

deadheadskier said:


> Riv, correct me if I'm wrong, but it would appear that you want Lance to be proven guilty.  That's fine, but I don't understand why you want that proof when you don't scorn his "cheating".
> 
> Regarding the baseball comparison and how what they did is worse than what Lance did because Lance was the best cyclist of his generation and one of the best ever; that argument works with McGuire, but certainly not Bonds.  FTR, I think Barry Bonds is one of the bigger aholes to ever be a professional athlete.  That said, take away him bulking up on drugs and breaking home run records late in his career, he's definitely on par with Lance as being the best of his generation and one of the best ever.
> 
> Taking the drugs out of the equation or ignoring them because so many greats have used them, I think Barry Bonds and Ken Griffey Jr are the two greatest position baseball players of my lifetime.  For perspective, I was born in 75.  There were plenty of old time greats like Yaz finishing out their career when I was a wee lad, but since 1985 or so, I can't think of any players that match those two; except for maybe Arod as painful as that is to say.



You can't compare Lance to Bonds or Griffey for one glaring reason...neither Bonds nor Griffey ever won a world series. For all their numbers and regular season glory, they were not winners in the sense they never won the event considered the pinnacle of their sport. 
Lance did that 7 years in a row.


----------



## deadheadskier (Sep 1, 2012)

Sure I can.  Just like I can say Barry Sanders was the best Running Back ever in the game of Football.  Team Sports.  I do recognize that in cycling, an individual needs a good team around him to win the Tour. It's not quite the same as baseball and football though with 25 and 53 man rosters respectively.


----------



## greger1982 (Sep 2, 2012)

Either way, he has good memories and a long ride. He's ahead because no one can take his experiences and memories away from him.
How many people get to ride a bike for a living and spend their days outside, doing what they love. He got to do it for years, and you can take away his medals, but you can't take away the good times he had.


----------



## andyzee (Sep 2, 2012)

greger1982 said:


> Either way, he has good memories and a long ride. He's ahead because no one can take his experiences and memories away from him.
> How many people get to ride a bike for a living and spend their days outside, doing what they love. He got to do it for years, and you can take away his medals, but you can't take away the good times he had.




Great, great, great, first post! My thoughts exactly.


----------



## JimG. (Sep 3, 2012)

deadheadskier said:


> Sure I can.  Just like I can say Barry Sanders was the best Running Back ever in the game of Football.  Team Sports.  I do recognize that in cycling, an individual needs a good team around him to win the Tour. It's not quite the same as baseball and football though with 25 and 53 man rosters respectively.



OK point taken...but it doesn't mean it's true.

Most Americans, unfortunately sometimes, equate greatness in sports with winning and championships. Fair or not, that's the case. Bonds, Griffey, and Sanders all fell short in that regard. I think Dan Marino is the best QB talent to ever play football, but he isn't the greatest QB of all time for one simple reason...he never won the big one. Look at LeBron James this year...finally accepted as the greatest basketball player of his generation because he finally won a championship. 

Lance had those bases covered 7 times over.


----------



## deadheadskier (Sep 3, 2012)

I can see your argument with a QB in football because they have so much influence over the outcome of a game, but that's the only position in the game I can see that argument for.  I can see your argument with a basketball player as there are only 5 players on the floor and the influence one player can have is huge.  I don't agree with that argument when it comes to baseball though.  Nolan Ryan, most strikeouts all time, fewest hits allowed per 9 innings all time, 7 no hitters, most strikeouts in a season - no WS rings.  Carl Yaztremski, last man to hit for the triple crown - no WS rings.  

I stand by my argument that Barry Bonds and Ken Griffey Jr. were the two best position players of their generation.


----------



## bobbutts (Sep 3, 2012)

Obviously I don't really know either way, but it seems very probable that LA did dope significantly to me.  I'm a bit surprised that so many here believe his innocence.


----------



## JimG. (Sep 4, 2012)

bobbutts said:


> Obviously I don't really know either way, but it seems very probable that LA did dope significantly to me.  I'm a bit surprised that so many here believe his innocence.



I doubt anyone here thinks he's innocent.

The thought is more likely that he's being singled out in a sport known for doping.


----------



## JimG. (Sep 4, 2012)

deadheadskier said:


> I can see your argument with a QB in football because they have so much influence over the outcome of a game, but that's the only position in the game I can see that argument for.  I can see your argument with a basketball player as there are only 5 players on the floor and the influence one player can have is huge.  I don't agree with that argument when it comes to baseball though.  Nolan Ryan, most strikeouts all time, fewest hits allowed per 9 innings all time, 7 no hitters, most strikeouts in a season - no WS rings.  Carl Yaztremski, last man to hit for the triple crown - no WS rings.
> 
> I stand by my argument that Barry Bonds and Ken Griffey Jr. were the two best position players of their generation.



Nolan Ryan did win a WS...with the Mets in 1969.

Yaz played for the Sox during the curse years...nuff said about that.

I do see your argument regarding the numbers of players on the field and the impact any one of those players can have on the outcome of a game. You are correct that this argument is much different for baseball.


----------



## RootDKJ (Sep 4, 2012)

JimG. said:


> I doubt anyone here thinks he's innocent.
> 
> The thought is more likely that he's being singled out in a sport known for doping.



Innocent until proven guilty.


----------



## riverc0il (Sep 4, 2012)

RootDKJ said:


> Innocent until proven guilty.


No contest in the agreed upon legal forum for a defense is guilty. When the evidence is so damning that you don't even want it made public, that is pretty damn guilty.

This is a fun photo:

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/...-of-the-tour-de-france-tainted-by-doping.html


----------



## RootDKJ (Sep 5, 2012)

riverc0il said:


> No contest in the agreed upon legal forum for a defense is guilty. When the evidence is so damning that you don't even want it made public, that is pretty damn guilty.
> 
> This is a fun photo:
> 
> http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/...-of-the-tour-de-france-tainted-by-doping.html



Pure speculation.  Nobody here can prove what Lance did or did not do.  Only he knows the truth, and he's not telling.  Personally, I stopped giving a shit about professional athletes when they started complaining that they couldn't live on less than $500K a year.


----------



## JimG. (Sep 5, 2012)

This is really the type of sports story we should talk about...pretty amazing:

http://msn.foxsports.com/olympics/c...r-handcycling-time-trial-090512?ocid=ansfox11


----------



## bvibert (Sep 6, 2012)

JimG. said:


> This is really the type of sports story we should talk about...pretty amazing:
> 
> http://msn.foxsports.com/olympics/c...r-handcycling-time-trial-090512?ocid=ansfox11


Indeed, very inspiring!


----------



## ScottySkis (Sep 6, 2012)

JimG. said:


> This is really the type of sports story we should talk about...pretty amazing:
> 
> http://msn.foxsports.com/olympics/c...r-handcycling-time-trial-090512?ocid=ansfox11





That is a great story thanks for posting it.


----------



## JimG. (Sep 6, 2012)

Scotty said:


> That is a great story thanks for posting it.



I remember when Zanardi was injured...he was the 2 time defending CART champion, they didn't mention that in the article. He was one of the best drivers of his time. Like most race drivers, he was cocky and very aggressive. I also remember when he drove an Indy car again 2 years later. I considered that the apex of his life.

Now he wins a gold medal at the paralympics. I am in awe. 

These types of people are the most inspiring individuals alive and they have earned my deepest respect and admiration.


----------



## mlctvt (Oct 11, 2012)

Well it looks like none of us will be defending Lance any more?
I was one who stood by Lance and gave him the benefit of doubt due to the lack of physical evidence and no positive tests, but the new evidence released this week and the 26 people giving extremely detailed affidavits it seems Lance wasn't just doping but he was one of the ring leaders if not the top official on US Postal/ Discovery pushing doping on young upcoming riders.


----------



## riverc0il (Oct 11, 2012)

VeloNews is pushing out content on this like crazy. I urge anyone with an opinion/interest on the matter to read through the USADA release which is available to public in its entirety. Many riders have been suspended (reduced sentence for cooperation) and had titles removed including George Hincapie and Levi Leipheimer who both actively raced right through the last season and unlike Landis and Hamilton were not in a "nothing to lose and publicity money to gain" situation.

I think the documentation sometimes strays into too much circumstantial rather than just focusing in on the fact that guys, many well respected especially GeorgeH, that were never caught doping are on record saying they saw LA dope or heard him discuss his doping or received dope from Lance. But when you read and digest it all, it is pretty wild.

I found the intimidation part of the release the most interesting. Specifically the case in which LA chased down a break away in a Tour (not something a GC contender ever does) to pull back someone dishing on doping to the media and gaving him a "zip it" visual captured by the media. It doesn't seem like a huge to do was made out of it back then, but in hind sight, that is pretty telling.


----------



## JimG. (Oct 11, 2012)

No more defense of LA.

I watched that 30-30 series on ESPN last night, the one about Ben Johnson, the 100 meter champ who set a world record of 9.79 in the Olympics then was busted for doping a day later. What an eye opener! I used to think Johnson was a maverick, a cheater, and a bad guy in general. How naive I was. Turns out he was just doing what everyone else did and had the audacity to beat Carl Lewis regularly. So Lewis made it his mission to get the guy busted. Turns out old Carl was a doper too.

What a jerk...Lewis was never a likeable athlete.


----------



## wa-loaf (Oct 17, 2012)

Stepping down from Livestrong and Nike is cancelling his contract.


----------



## wa-loaf (Oct 17, 2012)

I wonder if he'll ever just come out and admit it?


----------



## Nick (Oct 17, 2012)

i doubt it


----------



## ScottySkis (Oct 17, 2012)

Sent from my ADR6410LVW using Tapatalk 2

Drugs are bad.


----------



## riverc0il (Oct 17, 2012)

wa-loaf said:


> I wonder if he'll ever just come out and admit it?


I don't think he ever will. Even if he wants to, he has too much money tied up in everything. There would be massive law suits against him. Perhaps criminal penalties as well for perjury for lying in the civil suit brought against him. I don't know if the Federal investigation can be reopened or not? That carried some pretty hefty issues regarding defrauding the government.


----------



## bigbog (Oct 18, 2012)

wa-loaf said:


> Stepping down from Livestrong and Nike is cancelling his contract.



Yeah, that's what hits home......


----------



## SKIQUATTRO (Oct 19, 2012)

i'm defending lance at all, but you have to assume that the majority of the Tour riders dope/doped when Lance was winning and crushing everyone...so, in theory, it was a level playing field

that sport is a mess


----------



## riverc0il (Oct 19, 2012)

SKIQUATTRO said:


> i'm defending lance at all, but you have to assume that the majority of the Tour riders dope/doped when Lance was winning and crushing everyone...so, in theory, it was a level playing field


In so much as the top riders capable of winning were all doped, yes. One thought about doping is that is that different people's various physiology interact differently with the PEDs. So it might not be that the best of the dopers won but rather the best of the dopers that had the best physiological comparability with the drugs. Kinda a moot point any way, certain people will never be able to get their bodies into tour shape (i.e. the taller you are, the more bone you have, the less likely chance you have of loosing enough weight to be competitive). 

But I agree with your point in that Armstrong probably was the best of the dopers and he didn't pip anyone else that wasn't doping at the top of the sport.

From what I have read, it does seem like more riders were clean than I originally thought. I've read Hamilton's book and the affidavits. It seems like you needed to put out good results and be trust worthy to get on the team doping programs. But those guys probably weren't good enough to compete at the top of the peloton even doped if they weren't been sought out to take PEDs to support the team.


----------



## o3jeff (Jan 15, 2013)

Looks like he admitted using something, guess we'll have to watch Oprah to see.


----------



## mattm59 (Jan 20, 2013)

damn was I duped. Glad I'm old and am used to humanity...but lance really pulled the wool over my eyes. Apologies for defending him....


----------



## Hawkshot99 (Jan 20, 2013)

Big deal. So the guy that was doping beat the rest of the field that was doping. He was still never caught, just had people tatle on him.

Sent from my SGH-S959G using Tapatalk 2


----------



## ScottySkis (Jan 20, 2013)

I don't care about the story but in my book he is one son of a bitch because he kept on and on about how he didn't abuse and then he sued lots of people who said he did it that the worst part of the story.


----------



## Warp Daddy (Jan 20, 2013)

He has been an egotistical,avaricious ,mean spirited prick ,that lied pathologically and consistently ,without remorse for any collateral damage that he did to his kids , his family , his friends and to the  heretofore adoring public . 

He apparently is dealing at a level of abstraction that allows him to justify and spew revisionist history and self aggrandized personal dictionary that PARSES the situation in the most favorable light . His only remorse is that he got exposed, not for any pain financial , emotional or otherwise that he caused to many others . 

i hope the feds and the IRS hound him with forensic audits for the entire period and inflict justifiable pain on his finances


----------



## deadheadskier (Jan 20, 2013)

I think Geoge Carlin said it best.  NSFW obviously


----------



## Warp Daddy (Jan 20, 2013)

deadheadskier said:


> I think Geoge Carlin said it best.  NSFW obviously


p

Outstanding !!!!! ROFLMBFAO:beer:


----------



## mlctvt (Jan 20, 2013)

Warp Daddy said:


> p
> 
> Outstanding !!!!! ROFLMBFAO:beer:



I agree, perfect timing deadheadskier!


----------



## gmcunni (Jan 20, 2013)

i googled but couldn't find it - anyone know why he chose Oprah of all people to confess to?  Wife says it is because he knew Oprah wouldn't push hard on details related to the "how" he cheated.


----------



## riverc0il (Jan 20, 2013)

gmcunni said:


> i googled but couldn't find it - anyone know why he chose Oprah of all people to confess to?  Wife says it is because he knew Oprah wouldn't push hard on details related to the "how" he cheated.


How is somewhat irrelevent. Opera started out the interview with some straight up yes or no questions. Once he admitted to doing all the dope, who cares about the how? I know USADA and WADA would love more details to throw out additional racers but when everyone already believes that everyone was doped to the gills (at least the top guys) back then, what is the point?

I think he picked Opera because he wanted a national audience, particularly people that are NOT cyclists and fans. I think he wanted to sway the court of public opinion back into his favor. I'm sure OWN offered him a nice pay check, too. He may need that soon to pay for lawyers.


----------



## Puck it (Jan 20, 2013)

Who cares!  The whole sport dopes.


----------



## riverc0il (Jan 20, 2013)

Puck it said:


> Who cares!  The whole sport dopes.


I don't think that is true as much any more and the doping has definitely had to go to the micro level due to the success of the bio passport. I think it is feasible that a clean rider could win a major race now. Whereas in the LA era, it was impossible. Actually, from the books I have read, a lot of guys didn't dope in the LA era. But they didn't do so well. Some didn't have resources, some didn't have money, some actually made a moral position. Those are the guys that were worst effected by the major doping push... the guys that tried to race clean and couldn't.


----------



## deadheadskier (Jan 20, 2013)

gmcunni said:


> i googled but couldn't find it - anyone know why he chose Oprah of all people to confess to?  Wife says it is because he knew Oprah wouldn't push hard on details related to the "how" he cheated.



What I've been hearing is that Oprah paid Lance big time money for the interview.  Wouldn't surprise me in the least.  He's probably going to need all the cash he can get with how much he's going to get sued in the coming years by all the people he steamrolled.


----------



## Puck it (Jan 21, 2013)

riverc0il said:


> I don't think that is true as much any more and the doping has definitely had to go to the micro level due to the success of the bio passport. I think it is feasible that a clean rider could win a major race now. Whereas in the LA era, it was impossible. Actually, from the books I have read, a lot of guys didn't dope in the LA era. But they didn't do so well. Some didn't have resources, some didn't have money, some actually made a moral position. Those are the guys that were worst effected by the major doping push... the guys that tried to race clean and couldn't.



Bcause they all i have been caught.


----------



## wa-loaf (Jan 22, 2013)

riverc0il said:


> How is somewhat irrelevent. Opera started out the interview with some straight up yes or no questions. Once he admitted to doing all the dope, who cares about the how? I know USADA and WADA would love more details to throw out additional racers but when everyone already believes that everyone was doped to the gills (at least the top guys) back then, what is the point?
> 
> I think he picked Opera because he wanted a national audience, particularly people that are NOT cyclists and fans. I think he wanted to sway the court of public opinion back into his favor. I'm sure OWN offered him a nice pay check, too. He may need that soon to pay for lawyers.



I'm now picturing Lance in a viking helmet and blond pony tails singing out his confession on stage.


----------



## legalskier (Jan 30, 2013)

Omg another Armstrong implicated in doping.....wheelchair curling doping!

http://deadspin.com/5893881/what-is-going-on-with-all-the-doping-in-wheelchair-curling


----------

