Lance Armstrong
- Thread starter Cie
- Start date
- Feb 23, 2005
- 6,744
- 129
- 63
he passed all the tests, they have no concrete proof of anything, and unless that changes, they need to leave the guy alone
I am pro-Lance, which is why I wanted him to fight the allegations, if not kick that twirpy USADA guy's arse.
- Feb 23, 2005
- 6,744
- 129
- 63
feels like he's been fighting an unfair battle the whole time, what more could/can he have done?
- Feb 23, 2005
- 6,744
- 129
- 63
not when their resources are limitless and yours aren`t....this isn`t hollywood...it`s real life...
he`s been retired for what?...7 years?....and they`re still pursuing him with heresay evidence from(in some cases),snitches that caught a break....there is no hard evidence...no tainted test results... how many years should he continue this circlejerk?..
why do so many entities settle lawsuits rather than "fight to the death"?......no matter how rich armstrong is,he can`t outlast the bottomless pockets of the feds(usada is taxpayer funded...whicj is a disgrace considering our fiscal situation).....
Last edited:
I, like Cie and Greg, am also pro-Lance and this one is tough to swallow/comprehend. I want to believe the stance of not wasting resources and his time and energy, however, if it was Clemens, McGwire or Merriman stating something like that, I would laugh at it as I?m guessing most of you would. Does that make me a hypocrite? Perhaps.
Perhaps I?m also na?ve, but I still am pro-Lance until I see the evidence. He?s passed so many tests over the years. What can they actually prove? That what he allegedly did was not detectable but is at this time? How much weight does that hold? Testimony from Landis and Hamilton mean nothing. The only alleged testimony that I thought would be damming was George Hincapie. But it was never clear whether he was part of this UADA investigation or just summoned for the Federal inquiry that was dropped.
Doesn?t seem like the legal battle is over though yet. As opposed to fighting the UADA in the realm of their arbitration, it appears Lance would rather fight them on whether they have the ability to formally strip him of his titles. Lance is obviously a competitor and perhaps that battle was the better route to go in terms of a victory in this ordeal.
Perhaps I?m also na?ve, but I still am pro-Lance until I see the evidence. He?s passed so many tests over the years. What can they actually prove? That what he allegedly did was not detectable but is at this time? How much weight does that hold? Testimony from Landis and Hamilton mean nothing. The only alleged testimony that I thought would be damming was George Hincapie. But it was never clear whether he was part of this UADA investigation or just summoned for the Federal inquiry that was dropped.
Doesn?t seem like the legal battle is over though yet. As opposed to fighting the UADA in the realm of their arbitration, it appears Lance would rather fight them on whether they have the ability to formally strip him of his titles. Lance is obviously a competitor and perhaps that battle was the better route to go in terms of a victory in this ordeal.
Last edited:
Perhaps I?m being too optimistic but UCI?s statements/comments seem to be more posturing than supportive of another governing body?s decision. Will be interesting when they receive the documents/evidence from the USADA how long they take on the matter. If it was a solid case, should be pretty open and shut and simply the UCI opining on it.
The UCI and USADA have engaged in a turf war over who should prosecute allegations against Armstrong.
http://www.nbcsports.msnbc.com/id/48777406/ns/sports-cycling/
The UCI and USADA have engaged in a turf war over who should prosecute allegations against Armstrong.
http://www.nbcsports.msnbc.com/id/48777406/ns/sports-cycling/
Last edited:
Highest position Tour de France -99-05 riders that haven't been connected to doping cases:
Tour 1999 Daniele Nardello, 7th
Tour 2000 Daniele Nardello, 10th
Tour 2001 Andre? Kivilev, 4th
Tour 2002 Carlos Sastre, 10th
Tour 2003 Haimar Zubeldia, 5th
Tour 2004 Carlos Sastre, 8th
Tour 2005 Cadel Evans, 8th
at least Lance is not alone. Not taking any sides with this.
:0008
Tour 1999 Daniele Nardello, 7th
Tour 2000 Daniele Nardello, 10th
Tour 2001 Andre? Kivilev, 4th
Tour 2002 Carlos Sastre, 10th
Tour 2003 Haimar Zubeldia, 5th
Tour 2004 Carlos Sastre, 8th
Tour 2005 Cadel Evans, 8th
at least Lance is not alone. Not taking any sides with this.
:0008
You got that right. Anyone that knows anything about cycling will find it at the least highly improbable that Armstrong had the most incredible run in the sport's history, while being surrounded by cheaters, without getting some unnatural help.
If you wrote a movie about his story, nobody would believe it. Cycling is the most dope-filled sport this side of baseball. I would love to believe that Lance was clean, but reality makes me question it. :sadwave:
Here is a pretty good synopsis of the matter as it currently stands:
http://deadspin.com/5937611/what-th...ng-all-your-doping-scandal-questions-answered
http://deadspin.com/5937611/what-th...ng-all-your-doping-scandal-questions-answered
- Feb 26, 2001
- 13,593
- 164
- 63
- Mar 2, 2006
- 4,794
- 120
- 0
If it is true that cycling is filled with dopers, then I would say that having 7 titles is pretty freaking amazing, drugs or not. If you are going against a field that is all using similar advantages, then more power to you. In order to take all his titles, they should have to prove that everyone else was clean.
I liked his letter and it seems like he is ready to move on to other more important things in life, which he already has accomplished. While obviously his titles are a big part of his legacy, he is able to touch so many lives in a positive way in his fight against cancer, and that is way more important in the end. He will be remembered favorably by the people who really count.
It should be noted that part of the reason cycling is the most dope filled sport is that they have the most rigorous testing. If baseball had as extensive testing during the hey-day of steroids, teams would have been calling up huge chunks of their triple A squads when suspensions were handed down (if the CBA called for it back then).
And I do know a big question is whether the testing they were doing 10 years ago in cycling was enough to catch the methods of doping.
