USADA now after Lance

There were a few years of his TdF success where there was not a test for EPO. There is still not an accepted method for detecting autologous transfusions -- transfusions of your own blood -- today. They can detect plasticizers now; however, the test has not been adopted by WADA -- most recently noted in Contador's case. These guys had it mastered with transfusions and microdosing -- Contador popped for a microdose.

I can't recall which magazine it was last year that charted the Top 10 TdF finishers over the past 10 years which showed the winning margin, plus noted riders that either tested positive or have been implicated in doping cases. It was staggering to see it on paper.

Not taking anything away from him surviving cancer or training like an animal -- after all, he kicked Ullrich and Basso's butts when they were doping as well. The field was dirty, so the results were relative. It's an era of cycling that is over. Close the books on it already. Just end the charade.


Edit: I can't find the chart I referenced, but did find this one that simply shows the suspected racers. The article I referenced also shows how the winning margins were huge compared to 2011.

 

To me with the people getting smarter its time to just give up and let them do what they want. Daniel Tosh said it best

[youtube]NyyKLqlNTCM[/youtube]

 

Is there anywhere we can go to find if what you say here is valid? This is the first I've heard they had a mountain of evidence. In fact on the contrary, I'd heard on a number of occasions the case was weak and the y were talking about closing the case. Then a few months go by and they close the case? Seems to me, they didn't have a case.

If they were all doping it made for a level playing field so the best man won. This same man has done nothing but promote cycling and tri's along with raising millions of dollars for cancer research. I'm sorry I just don't feel like hanging him. He is a good man.

Cycling is tested more then any other sport and no one is getting away with it any longer. We have the cleanest of professional sports now and I'm proud to be a fan.


Now the USADA is looking for validity, what better way to get it then to go after a big name star and get your name all over the news? Seriously, who ever heard of them before this? But now when they go to seak congressional funding they'll have name recognition and what congressman wants to go down on record that they voted against this agency that is supposedly seeking drug abuse.

This 100% politically motivated, makes me sick.

 

Honestly, when you're in the highest performing echelons of sport, who doesn't dope?!? I firmly believe that none of the top racers were totally clean. Just my humble opinion, of course.

Maybe they need 10 years of congressional hearings to figure it out.../roll eyes

 

Since this is being discussed again - CAN THE MEMBER WHO POSTED THE GREAT SI ARTICLE LAST YEAR OR PRIOR ON LANCE AND DOPING RE-POST IT? THANKS

After reading that it was hard to believe Lance was clean.

 

It's important to note that prosecuting a "criminal case" and proving he doped are two different things. The feds were trying to prove he structured a doping ring with government funds, there wasn't question he doped, there may of been a question of proof to convince it met the criminal charges. It's also important to separate "raising millions for research" and "awareness."

I agree with you that he was the best of the lot and has raised "awareness" for cancer, all positive. I've been careful to state that my issue is the lying and the response that so many take "so what, they all doped" or "it was so long ago" or "it's just and agenda by the French or USADA." To the casual cycling fan I can understand that position, but to one that values truth without limitation in the sport, I can't accept it.

 

You mean this one? http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1180944/7/index.htm

Even long time Lance apologist Bill Strickland is writing he believes Lance doped.http://www.bicycling.com/news/pro-cycling/lance-armstrongs-endgame

I would guess that is part of the PR spin that is coming because there isn't another journalist that close to being inside the Armstrong camp. I bet Lance wishes now he had called his buddy Messick and got Floyd a ride in that TOC.

 

Public funded agency? No oversight?

This wouldn't be an election year would it?

 

I really don't give a crap about whether he doped or not. Why does an agency exist to regulate doping in sports? Doesn't the DEA already exist to handle that? What a waste of freakin money.

 

Very good point.

Why is this important? You've repeatedly gone after Lance in this thread stating that he's a hypocrite for creating a foundation and working to raise money and awareness for Cancer. Why is that hypocritical? His foundation isn't about clean cycling, so even if he did dope that has nothing to do with the fact that he fought back from terminal cancer and won the Tour de France 7 consecutive times. Do you think he sat on the couch and watched TV, then took EPO and rode like that?

Yes, if he doped, which he most likely did, and he lied about it, which he most likely did, then that's duplicitous and is awful. But nearly every one of his predecessors (i.e. Coppi, Merckxx, Hinault, Riis, Pantani) and successors (i.e. Landis, Contador) doped and lied about it too. That is the sad, twisted tradition of cycling. I don't like it and don't understand it and wish it would stop too.

But I'm sick of people acting like Lance invented doping--like it didn't exist before him. Give me a Fing break...

Landis and Hamilton aren't pissed that Armstrong cheated; they're pissed that they got caught and he didn't. What's honorable in that? The real tragedy will be if Hincapie, Leipheimer, Vandevelde and Zabriskie back up the claims that US Postal were all doping. Those guys I will believe; not Landis or Hamilton--not anymore.

Yes, Lance most likely doped as nearly everyone around him in the placings were doped up too. Yes, that's bad. But come on--most pro cyclists didn't go to college; their entire earnings potential is wrapped up in their ability to win / their record.

So what is USADA planning on doing, stripping him of his titles? Who are they going to give them to--Ullrich? Basso? Vinokourov?

I don't see how any good will come of this.

 

Regarding the research vs. awareness I was simply pointing out that livestrong is a first and foremost a business that generates hundreds of millions, pays it board and executives millions, 40 million dollar jets etc. Under this guise, most people would assume that a reasonable portion of the money goes to research, when in fact very little does. Most of it used to expand and protect the brand. Per several posted opinions, the strategy is working, a positive, albeit bloated, is cancelling out a negative. If we apply that logic to other areas of society, should we accept it? Church, State, organized crime, this tactic has been in play since the beginning of time. To be very clear, I'm not against the business, foundation, charity, whatever you want to call it. I'm against those who use it to justify that he should get a pass.

You are correct that doping has been around since the beginning and he certainly did not invent it, perfect it maybe. But that leads back to my point, is it acceptable for someone to remain decorated the greatest of all time because the cheating was status quo? Is it more or less acceptable to dope because you don't have a college degree, come on.

Most here say they wish it would stop but then trash the USADA. This should be exactly the message and action we would want an organization to take tasked with changing the culture of doping in sports, start at the top. The UCI would have to sift through the fall out and that should not be a concern of USADA. They are tasked with outing cheats and I think their whole reputation will hinder on this case. I suspect most looking for Hincampie and crews testimony to validate the doping will get what they are looking for. Most, including George, testified to the grand jury and have since hired legal teams and PR that specialize in the upcoming fall out.

The good that will come of this will not be immediate, it will be further down the road when my kids, young riders, the next generation of cycling looks back and sees that the truth was stronger than deception, the sport was bigger than the doctors, and if they are competing, there may be a chance they are on a level paying field and judged only by their hard work.

 

Not a question? Please present your documented and verified evidence as soon as possible and save the USADA and us all a lot of time and money.

Agreed. Shall we go after Mickey Mantle or hundreds of other past stars in dozens of other sports while we're at it? How many of those guys drank and smoked all night then popped a handfull of uppers to get them through the next day's game? HGH and EPO are just the latest chapters in that book, so how far back are we willing to go? We might as well close down the halls of fame for most major sports and erase the record books.

Good point, but also unfortunately true of many, many charities, and should probably be a separate thread.

I appreciate your commitment to the truth and full disclosure, but it's also a slippery slope toward revisionist history. As I posted earlier, unless someone is also going to go back and hold Basso, Ulrich, etc. to the same scrutiny, then I don't think it accomplishes the goal of cleaning up the sport. I'd much rather see the time and money put into systems and technologies to ensure that it never happens from now forward. Otherwise it can be seen as a politically motivated vendetta, and will likely hang over the sport for decades.

 

Regarding documentation, in the fed case they had already moved past that discovery early on, then proceeded to the using gov't money to fund doping, apparently that's where they pulled the plug. We'll see what the evidence is as the USADA case proceeds.

I'm not so sure we're in revisionist history yet, he's still actively involved in the sport. When referring to Basso, Ulrich and so on they have admitted it and that's all I'm looking for. No hanging, no dismantling of livestrong, heck keep the victories if you must, but set the record straight that this has all been part of the "doping era" and then move on. Continuing to deny it just keeps its going. I'm out of gas on this one, we'll see how it goes.

Wheelie Out.

 

Both Basso and Ullrich have been sanctioned for doping. In Jan's case it was precisely the same as this action against Armstrong. He was retroactively stripped of results and prevented from participating in cycling events even after he retired. I would also note that Ullrich was also tested as many times as Armstrong and never came up positive. If not for a bag of blood seized by police in a raid on a Spanish doctor there is no way he would have ever been caught. Basso went down the same way... never failed a test out of the hundreds that he took as a stage and grand tour winner. The whole system sucks and the UCI has proven to be inept at best in discouraging doping. I really don't care what they do to Armstrong if he stays away from cycling, but Bruyneel, Riis, Ferrari, Fuentes, McQuaid and the rest of those responsible for propagating doping on their teams and in the sport must be banned before there will ever be a clean future.

 

Where are you getting your numbers? Can you provide me a link?

According to Charity Navigator, and independent firm which analyzes and rates charities, "Livestrong" / The Lance Armstrong Foundation is given their highest rating--4 stars. The foundation's revenues are about $30 million to $40 million (not "hundreds of millions") and they pay their CEO $328k per year. Lance and the other board members were paid $0. They do have a CFO and some other fulltime staff, which is necessary for an organization of that size but the salaries are not exorbitant--that is why Charity Navigator ranks the foundation so high. Charities which have a high percentage of their revenues going to pay admin costs or fundraising costs are ranked lower.

You can see their tax returns and annual audited financials online here: http://www.livestrong.org/pdfs/4-0/LAF-2010-Form-990. On that form, you can see everything for yourself. They do that so that people can know whether it's a reputable charity or not.

 

"If Lance Armstrong went to jail and Livestrong went away, that would be a huge setback in our war against cancer, right? Not exactly, because the famous nonprofit donates almost *nothing to scientific research. BILL GIFFORD looks at where the money goes and finds a mix of fine ideas, millions of dollars aimed at “awareness,” and a few very blurry lines."

This is from an Outside article that outlines the criticisms of Lance and Livestrong. It's not all bad/critical, but their money isn't necessarily going where many assume (Research). If you're interested, it's worth a read... http://www.outsideonline.com/outdoo...rong/Its-Not-About-the-Lab-Rats.html?page=all

 

That's part of the problem for me: Basso and Ullrich have been sanctioned, so if Armstrong was stripped of any titles, should those guys be considered the winners? How deep into the peloton do they go to find a "clean" winner, and what can be proved at this point anyway. That's why I favor letting the results stand, add an asterisk in the record books if needed, and put the time and money into better enforcement now and in the future.

And yes, a bigger step, to me, toward a cleaner future for the sport would be to impose a sort of death penalty for team owners, managers, trainers, coaches, etc., who are found guilty in these things. Let the first offense lead to a 2 or 3 year worldwide ban from the sport, and the 2nd major violation results in a lifetime ban, period. These guys should be held to a higher standard, and the ones who pressure their riders, design the systems of cheating, and engage in the cover-ups should pay a heavier price.

 

Sorry, I got that jet thing confused with Jay-Z, it was only 11 mil. The organization does a lot of good. So many mention that the good LS has done somehow justifies the fraud. I hope when the kimono opens they survive.

 

It still looks like a vendetta or harassment to me. Either that or someone is trying to make a name for themselves for being the one who took down Lance. It seems to me that by constantly going after him they are just trying to beat a confession out of him. I mean seriously wth is this, "It also said most of the allegations fall outside of USADA's eight-year statute of limitations but the agency argues that Armstrong keeps expanding the time limit by continuing to deny drug use."? So what, now there's only a statute of limitations if you admit to taking drugs?
Plus, who ever they get to testify probably either has an agenda or it's just sour grapes.

I have no idea if he took performance enhancing drugs or not and unless you personally shot up EPO or did a transfusion with him you shouldn't front like you know either.

I say unless they have some hard evidence from a recent test, they need to give it a rest.
To me the USADA are acting no better than the UFO conspiracy theorists that say the government keeps denying the existence of aliens and they won't be happy until they admit it.


"AUSTIN, Texas -- Lance Armstrong filed a scathing response Friday to the latest doping allegations against him, accusing the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency of violating its own rules and possibly breaking federal law during its investigation.
The agency said Armstrong used performance-enhancing drugs and other improper methods to win cycling's premiere event, the Tour de France, from 1999-2005. Friday was the deadline for Armstrong to respond to USADA's warning that charges were pending before his case moves to the next stage.


Armstrong, who denies doping and notes he never has failed a drug test, could be stripped of his titles and banned from cycling, though he retired from the sport last year.
In their 11-page document, Armstrong's attorneys complained they still haven't been allowed to see the evidence against him, including witness names and any expert analysis to support USADA's claim that 2009 and 2010 blood tests are "fully consistent" with blood doping.
The letter said USADA's case is "long on stale allegations disproved long ago and short on evidence" and "offensive to any notions of due process."


Armstrong's case now goes to a three-person USADA review board, which will decide if there is enough evidence to support the charges. If USADA files formal charges, the case could go to a three-person arbitration panel by November.
"The Review Board must recommend that this case not move forward," the letter said.
Armstrong's attorneys made similar claims in previous letters, but Friday's document appeared to lay out his potential legal strategy should he file a federal lawsuit against USADA.
Armstrong's letter argues that USADA's rules allow the review board to consider materials submitted from an accused athlete, but complains that he can't mount a legitimate defense until he's able to see the evidence against him. USADA has said it is withholding witness identities to protect them from intimidation.
If the case moves to an arbitration hearing, Armstrong will be allowed to review the evidence in advance and will be allowed to cross-examine witnesses.
Travis Tygart, USADA's chief executive officer, said in a statement that the rules "provide full due process and are designed to get to the truth."
USADA's warning letter to Armstrong said 10 former teammates are willing to testify that they either know he used performance-enhancing drugs or talked about using them and encouraged them within the team. USADA says Armstrong used the blood-booster EPO, steroids and improper blood transfusions.
Armstrong's attorneys say they believe USADA investigators coerced false testimony from witnesses by promising not to charge them with doping; they argue this could violate bribery laws.
They also question whether USADA improperly gained access to testimony in a recent federal grand jury criminal investigation that ended in February with no charges filed against Armstrong.
The letter notes that Tygart participated in witness interviews with federal criminal investigators.
Armstrong's letter also challenged the 2009-10 blood tests, which were taken during his two-year comeback from retirement. Armstrong passed all his drug tests during that period and posted his testing results on his website, Livestrong.com, and no charges were brought, the letter said.
It also said most of the allegations fall outside of USADA's eight-year statute of limitations but the agency argues that Armstrong keeps expanding the time limit by continuing to deny drug use.
USADA has said it is also pursuing doping charges against Johan Bruyneel, the manager of Armstrong's winning Tour de France teams; team doctors Pedro Celaya and Luis Garcia del Moral; team trainer Pepe Marti, and consulting doctor Michele Ferrari.
Bruyneel, who now leads the RadioShack-Nissan-Trek team, said Friday he won't attend this year's Tour de France because the allegations would be a distraction for his team and the race. Bruyneel says he is innocent."

 

Even the negative article in Outside pointed out that Armstrong bought the plane personally--Livestrong funds weren't used. For the record, I don't believe Armstrong's charity work should justify any wrongdoing. I just don't believe in throwing out the baby with the bath water. If the guy doped, which he probably did, and lied about it, which he probably did, then that's bad and he should be judged and punished like any of his predecessors who did the same.

But his doping doesn't make Livestrong a hoax or sham--he really did have terminal cancer, beat it and come back and win the Tour 7 consecutive times. Whether he doped or not matters, but it's not everything.