Not happy with Lance

> 10 years ago
Reply
Register to post, see what you've read, and subscribe to topics.
Ted the Kiwi
Ted the Kiwi
NSW
14256 posts
NSW, 14256 posts
24 Aug 2012 1:43pm
I knew that he must have been guilty but I really did not want to believe it



LANCE Armstrong will not fight drug charges from the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency, putting his unprecedented string of seven Tour de France titles at risk along with his legacy as one of the greatest cyclists in history.

The decision sets up a likely lifetime ban from the sport and the possibility that Armstrong will be stripped of his signature achievement - the extraordinary run of Tour titles he won from 1999-2005.
Gorgo
Gorgo
VIC
5124 posts
VIC, 5124 posts
24 Aug 2012 2:12pm
It's actually a masterpiece of media manipulation. What he is saying is "I didn't do it. You can all go and get f*cked. I've got better things to do."

If he continues to fight and loses then it follows that his guilt in undeniable.

Doing it this way he looks like an eagle surrounded by turkeys.
SP
SP
10982 posts
SP SP
10982 posts
24 Aug 2012 12:22pm
Good on him, the USada is on a witch hunt... The UCI don't think he's guilty, the French doping authorities never got him and all his near 1000s of drug test are clean, the only evidence is from other proven drug takers..

I doubt be will lose his tour titles, the UCI, supported him in his court case to throw the charges out.


Good article here..

www.smh.com.au/sport/cycling/armstrong-drops-drugs-fight-cycling-legend-to-lose-tour-de-france-titles-20120824-24qk5.html

US Anti-Doping Agency chief executive Travis Tygart says the agency will ban Lance Armstrong from cycling for life and strip him of his seven Tour de France titles for doping.

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

Armstrong on Thursday night local time dropped any further challenges to USADA's allegations that he took performance-enhancing drugs to win cycling's premier event from 1999 to 2005.

Armstrong says USADA doesn't have the authority to vacate his Tour titles. However, Tygart told The Associated Press that USADA can do it.

Advertisement
Tygart called the Armstrong case a "heartbreaking" example of a win-at-all costs approach to sports.

Armstrong, who retired last year, declined to enter arbitration - his last option - because he said he was weary of fighting accusations that have dogged him for years. He has consistently pointed to the hundreds of drug tests that he has passed as proof of his innocence.

"There comes a point in every man's life when he has to say, 'Enough is enough.' For me, that time is now," Armstrong said in a statement sent to The Associated Press. He called the USADA investigation an "unconstitutional witch hunt".

"I have been dealing with claims that I cheated and had an unfair advantage in winning my seven Tours since 1999," he said. "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."

Armstrong insisted his decision is not an admission of drug use, but a refusal to enter an arbitration process he believes is improper and unfair to athletes facing charges.

"USADA cannot assert control of a professional international sport and attempt to strip my seven Tour de France titles," he said. "I know who won those seven Tours, my teammates know who won those seven Tours, and everyone I competed against knows who won those seven Tours."

USADA maintains that Armstrong has used banned substances as far back as 1996, including the blood-booster EPO and steroids as well as blood transfusions - all to boost his performance.

The 40-year-old Armstrong walked away from the sport in 2011 without being charged following a two-year federal criminal investigation into many of the same accusations he faces from USADA.

The federal probe was closed in February, but USADA announced in June it had evidence Armstrong used banned substances and methods - and encouraged their use by teammates. The agency also said it had blood tests from 2009 and 2010 that were "fully consistent" with blood doping.

Included in USADA's evidence were emails written by Armstrong's former US Postal Service teammate Floyd Landis, who was stripped of his 2006 Tour de France title after a positive drug test. Landis's emails to a USA Cycling official detailed allegations of a complex doping program on the team.

USADA also said it had 10 former Armstrong teammates ready to testify against him. Other than suggesting they include Landis and Tyler Hamilton, both of whom have admitted to doping offences, the agency has refused to say who they are or specifically what they would say.

"There is zero physical evidence to support [the] outlandish and heinous claims. The only physical evidence here is the hundreds of [doping] controls I have passed with flying colours," Armstrong said.

Armstrong sued USADA in Austin, where he lives, in an attempt to block the case and was supported by the UCI, the sport's governing body. A judge threw out the case on Monday, siding with USADA despite questioning the agency's pursuit of Armstrong in his retirement.

"USADA's conduct raises serious questions about whether its real interest in charging Armstrong is to combat doping, or if it is acting according to less noble motives [such as politics or publicity]," US District Judge Sam Sparks wrote.

Now the ultra-competitive Armstrong has done something virtually unthinkable for him: He has quit before a fight is over.

"Today I turn the page. I will no longer address this issue, regardless of the circumstances. I will commit myself to the work I began before ever winning a single Tour de France title: serving people and families affected by cancer, especially those in underserved communities," Armstrong said.

Armstrong could have pressed his innocence in USADA's arbitration process, but the cyclist has said he believes most people have already made up their minds about whether he's a fraud or a persecuted hero.

It's a stunning move for an athlete who built his reputation on not only beating cancer, but forcing himself through gruelling off-season workouts no one else could match, then crushing his rivals in the Alps and the Pyrenees.

Although he had already been crowned a world champion and won individual stages at the Tour de France, Armstrong was still relatively unknown in the US until he won the epic race for the first time in 1999. It was the ultimate comeback tale: When diagnosed with cancer, doctors had given him less than a 50 per cent chance of survival before surgery and brutal cycles of chemotherapy saved his life.

Armstrong's riveting victories, his work for cancer awareness and his gossip-page romances with rocker Sheryl Crow, fashion designer Tory Burch and actress Kate Hudson made him a figure who transcended sports.

His dominance of the Tour de France elevated the sport's popularity in America to unprecedented levels. His story and success helped sell millions of the "Livestrong" plastic yellow wrist bracelets, and enabled him to enlist lawmakers and global policymakers to promote cancer awareness and research. His Lance Armstrong Foundation has raised nearly $500 million since its founding in 1997.

Created in 2000, USADA is recognised by Congress as the official anti-doping agency for Olympic sports in the United States. Its investigators joined US agents during the federal probe, and USADA chief executive Travis Tygart had dismissed Armstrong's lawsuit as an attempt at "concealing the truth." He said the agency is motivated by one goal - exposing cheaters in sport.

Others close to Armstrong were caught up in the charges: Johan Bruyneel, the coach of Armstrong's teams, and three members of the medical staff and a consultant were also charged.

Bruyneel is taking his case to arbitration, while two medical team staffers and consulting doctor Michele Ferrari didn't formally contest the charges and were issued lifetime ban by USADA. Ferrari later said he was innocent.

In a sport rife with cheaters, Armstrong has been under constant suspicion since the 1990s from those who refused to believe he was a clean rider winning cycling's premier event against a field of doped-up competition.

He had tense public disputes with USADA, the World Anti-Doping Agency, some former teammates and assistants and even Greg LeMond, the first American to win the Tour de France.

Through it all, Armstrong vigorously denied any and all hints, rumours and direct accusations he was cheating. He had the blazing personality, celebrity and personal wealth needed to fight back with legal and public relations battles to clear his name - and he did, time after time.

Armstrong won his first Tour at a time when doping scandals had rocked the race. He was leading the race when a trace amount of a banned anti-inflammatory corticosteroid was found in his urine; cycling officials said he was authorised to use a small amount of a cream to treat saddle sores.

After Armstrong's second victory in 2000, French judicial officials investigated his Postal Service team for drug use. That investigation ended with no charges, but the allegations kept coming.

Armstrong was criticised for his relationship with Ferrari, who was banned by Italian authorities over doping charges in 2002. Former personal and team assistants accused Armstrong of having steroids in an apartment in Spain and disposing of syringes that were used for injections.

In 2004, a Dallas-based promotions company initially refused to pay him a $5 million bonus for winning his sixth Tour de France because it wanted to investigate allegations raised by media in Europe. Testimony in that case included former teammate Frankie Andreu and his wife, Betsy, saying Armstrong told doctors during his 1996 cancer treatments that he had taken a cornucopia of steroids and performance-enhancing drugs.

Two books published in Europe, L.A. Confidential and L.A. Official, also raised doping allegations and, in 2005, French magazine L'Equipe reported that retested urine samples from the 1999 Tour showed EPO use.

Armstrong fought every accusation with denials and, in some cases, lawsuits against the European media outlets that reported them.

But he showed signs that he was tiring of the never-ending questions. Armstrong retired (for the first time) in 2005 and almost immediately considered a comeback before deciding to stay on the sidelines, in part, because he didn't want to keep answering doping questions.

"I'm sick of this," Armstrong said in 2005. "Sitting here today, dealing with all this stuff again, knowing if I were to go back, there's no way I could get a fair shake - on the roadside, in doping control, or the labs."

But three years later, Armstrong was 36 and itching to ride again. He came back to finish third in the 2009 Tour de France.

Armstrong raced in the Tour again in 2010, under the cloud of the federal criminal investigation. Early last year, he quit the sport for good, but made a brief return as a triathlete until the USADA investigation shut him down.

During his sworn testimony in the dispute over the $US5 million bonus, Armstrong said he wouldn't take performance enhancing drugs because he had too much to lose.

"[The] faith of all the cancer survivors around the world. Everything I do off the bike would go away, too," Armstrong said then. "And don't think for a second I don't understand that. It's not about money for me. Everything. It's also about the faith that people have put in me over the years. So all of that would be erased."

AP
doggie
doggie
WA
15849 posts
WA, 15849 posts
24 Aug 2012 2:29pm
Armstrong to be stripped of Tour titles

Lance Armstrong will be stripped of his seven Tour de France titles after announcing he will not fight charges brought by the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency.


Armstrong made the shock announcement in a statement in which he cited a familiar defence, but said he was "finished with this nonsense".

"There comes a point in every man's life when he has to say, "enough is enough," the statement read.

"For me, that time is now. I have been dealing with claims that I cheated and had an unfair advantage in winning my seven Tours since 1999.

"Over the past three years, I have been subjected to a two-year federal criminal investigation followed by (USADA CEO) Travis Tygart's unconstitutional witch hunt.

"The toll this has taken on my family, and my work for our foundation and on me leads me to where I am today."

The move by Armstrong paves the way for USADA to strip the 40-year-old of his cycling titles and ban him from competition for life.

The agency confirmed to ninemsn a short time ago that it would be proceeding with the penalties, saying it was a "sad day for all of us who love sport and our athletic heroes".

"This is a heartbreaking example of how the win-at-all-costs culture of sport, if left unchecked, will overtake fair, safe and honest competition," the agency added in a statement.

"For clean athletes, it is a reassuring reminder that there is hope for future generations to compete on a level playing field without the use of performance-enhancing drug".

The agency has always maintained it has overwhelming evidence that Armstrong doped, based on lab results and eyewitness accounts. It is believed that at least three of his former Tour de France teammates were willing to testify against him.

In making his announcement, Armstrong said he would "commit myself to the work I began before ever winning a single Tour de France title: serving people and families affected by cancer, especially those in underserved communities."

Earlier this week, a US federal judge dismissed Armstrong's lawsuit against USADA, despite the athlete's assertion that USADA lacked jurisdiction to pursue a case against him.

Armstrong had also claimed the agency's arbitration process violated his rights under the US constitution. He could have appealed to a higher court.

http://wwos.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=8521511
PaddlePig
PaddlePig
WA
421 posts
WA, 421 posts
24 Aug 2012 3:02pm
Gorgo said...

It's actually a masterpiece of media manipulation. What he is saying is "I didn't do it. You can all go and get f*cked. I've got better things to do."

If he continues to fight and loses then it follows that his guilt in undeniable.

Doing it this way he looks like an eagle surrounded by turkeys.


This is true, they haven't proven anything new, it's just he's stopped fighting because the fight is taking its toll.

Then again, I reckon most the tour guys are not natural in some way or another. What I mean is, most inject vitamins which are normal, but injecting things just to be on a level playing field is a bit heavy for me.
doggie
doggie
WA
15849 posts
WA, 15849 posts
24 Aug 2012 3:05pm
PaddlePig said...

Gorgo said...

It's actually a masterpiece of media manipulation. What he is saying is "I didn't do it. You can all go and get f*cked. I've got better things to do."

If he continues to fight and loses then it follows that his guilt in undeniable.

Doing it this way he looks like an eagle surrounded by turkeys.


This is true, they haven't proven anything new, it's just he's stopped fighting because the fight is taking its toll.

Then again, I reckon most the tour guys are not natural in some way or another. What I mean is, most inject vitamins which are normal, but injecting things just to be on a level playing field is a bit heavy for me.


So if he doesnt fight he loses 7 titles, if he fights and wins he dosnt. Sounds to me he knows the result already.
pweedas
pweedas
WA
4642 posts
WA, 4642 posts
24 Aug 2012 3:26pm
It looks like the lesson is, you can be good at something but don't be too good at it.

I'm sort of comparing this with a local footballer who was good at it.
Some people said he must be on drugs.
The better he got at it, the more people said it.
Eventually they were all proved right.
Now he doesn't play football anymore.

If Lance was taking anything illegal I find it hard to believe that he would be sharing that little secret with his team.
Ted the Kiwi
Ted the Kiwi
NSW
14256 posts
NSW, 14256 posts
24 Aug 2012 5:51pm
doggie said...
So if he doesnt fight he loses 7 titles, if he fights and wins he dosnt. Sounds to me he knows the result already.


I sort of agree with Doggie here - yes he has passed 1000's of tests etc - but does he really want to be found lying in court and have to go to jail? This way he can walk away and still claim he is innocent as he has never been caught out. There is no way he would be happy to lose those titles if he was innocent I reckon.

mineral1
mineral1
WA
4564 posts
WA, 4564 posts
24 Aug 2012 4:43pm
pweedas said...

It looks like the lesson is, you can be good at something but don't be too good at it.

I'm sort of comparing this with a local footballer who was good at it.
Some people said he must be on drugs.
The better he got at it, the more people said it.
Eventually they were all proved right.
Now he doesn't play football anymore.

If Lance was taking anything illegal I find it hard to believe that he would be sharing that little secret with his team.


You have got to be pulling the pizz here, if you are talking of the AFL, ex West Coast player.
If you believe that the gear he was reputed to be on, enhanced his performance, then one would have to believe there are green men on mars. His habit comprised recreational gear not performance enhancing as reputed about Armstrong.
Recreational gear didn't improve Johnsey from the Newcastle Nights either, but why let facts get in the way of a good beat up A
choco
choco
SA
4181 posts
SA, 4181 posts
24 Aug 2012 6:13pm
so if he does lose his titles the media will from that day on refer to him as "Lance Armstrong drug cheat" bit sad how much difference would drugs make in performance with so many variables over the Tour/France?
doggie
doggie
WA
15849 posts
WA, 15849 posts
24 Aug 2012 5:02pm
choco said...

so if he does lose his titles the media will from that day on refer to him as "Lance Armstrong drug cheat" bit sad how much difference would drugs make in performance with so many variables over the Tour/France?


I would say massive, alot of the drugs used are for speedy recovery, day after day after day. And also some use drugs to cover other drugs.
pierrec45
pierrec45
NSW
2005 posts
NSW, 2005 posts
24 Aug 2012 11:27pm
He dragged it as long as he could, for years, so he could make max money out of his cheating. He's still grandstanding too - incredible.

Same category of people as Marion Jones, Kelli White, Barry Bonds, many others.
FlySurfer
FlySurfer
NSW
4460 posts
NSW, 4460 posts
25 Aug 2012 12:19am
Fark the FDA, USDA, USADA, USA, whatever fascist BS, and all drug testing!

I couldn't give cr@p what he took or didn't take, the bastard cycled like a man on a mission.

Drug testing should be banned it's degrading for the athletes, and it's boring.
dan berry
dan berry
WA
2562 posts
WA, 2562 posts
24 Aug 2012 10:55pm
I don't get it, if he passed over 500 drug tests clean as a whistle while he was racing how can they call him a cheat? I don't blame him for saying he's sick of fighting this sh?t. What's he going to do? Just fight for the rest of his life to prove what has already been proved over the years of being constantly tested???
newguy
newguy
654 posts
654 posts
24 Aug 2012 11:02pm
These institutions really have it in for the few that exceed at life don't they? Never proven guilty, maybe it is time to drop the cases and focus on the now and keeping the game clean? Lance did great strides for the sports and his charity work is that much more makes him respectable. Great way to destroy the sport by tarnishing a legend. I even read his biography and that inspired me a lot to where I am today.

IMHO, he is not a cheat until proven and in a bleak skeptic world, I'd like to live life believing there is still a whimper of good in life. You can liken him to Julian Assange, take on the corporates and if you beat them, they will be the mosquitoes in your life pecking at you until one day you get malaria.

The world needs more good - bet none of these corporations did any community work for the greater good. Sports is just a vehicle for entertainment.
pweedas
pweedas
WA
4642 posts
WA, 4642 posts
24 Aug 2012 11:06pm
mineral1 said...

pweedas said...

It looks like the lesson is, you can be good at something but don't be too good at it.

I'm sort of comparing this with a local footballer who was good at it.
Some people said he must be on drugs.
The better he got at it, the more people said it.
Eventually they were all proved right.
Now he doesn't play football anymore.

If Lance was taking anything illegal I find it hard to believe that he would be sharing that little secret with his team.


You have got to be pulling the pizz here, if you are talking of the AFL, ex West Coast player.
If you believe that the gear he was reputed to be on, enhanced his performance, then one would have to believe there are green men on mars. His habit comprised recreational gear not performance enhancing as reputed about Armstrong.
Recreational gear didn't improve Johnsey from the Newcastle Nights either, but why let facts get in the way of a good beat up A



There's very little difference in the ability of players at that level The thing that makes a good player into a brilliant player is the mental attitude on the day. In fact on the hour.
If you think you are invincible and you can fly then your ordinary performance can be a brilliant performance.
Some drugs do exactly that.

Poida
Poida
WA
1922 posts
WA, 1922 posts
24 Aug 2012 11:52pm
I can't be bothered reading the pages of info! sad for second place if it was true.

It's hard to believe cyclist backing up really hard days in the alps with an even better day on the next alpine climb, day after day. Usually after one big day they have to recover a bit for a day or so before another big day? It's amazing the number of cyclist caught for doping in the tour who have had two days in a row of comprehensively beating the other riders.

Can anyone tell us what he was allegedly using, was it some type of epo?
And where can I get some
dan berry
dan berry
WA
2562 posts
WA, 2562 posts
25 Aug 2012 9:57am
I'm confused. If they are accusing him of being a drug cheat they must have a positive test yea? But from all accounts he has passed all of his tests over his whole career????
Scotty88
Scotty88
4214 posts
4214 posts
25 Aug 2012 10:46am
dan berry said...

I'm confused. If they are accusing him of being a drug cheat they must have a positive test yea? But from all accounts he has passed all of his tests over his whole career????


So did Marion Jones.
pweedas
pweedas
WA
4642 posts
WA, 4642 posts
25 Aug 2012 11:23am
dan berry said...

I'm confused. If they are accusing him of being a drug cheat they must have a positive test yea? But from all accounts he has passed all of his tests over his whole career????


The tests they do on the day are only for a small number known drug types.
New drugs come on the market continually, and they are designed so that they are not detected by the tests which the manufacturer knows are commonly done. They are then sold to the user on the basis that they are undetectable.
They are very expensive!

When they take blood samples for testing, they test one sample for known drugs and they store another sample for later testing for drugs unknown at the time of testing. They can store them for many years.

When it becomes known what the new drug in common use is, tests are devised and incorporated into the testing regime.
Every so often they pull out some old samples and test for the drugs which they couldn't test for before.
Sometimes they come up with a positive result.
From what I've heard, this is what is happening here.
They say they have tested some old samples and they say they test positive for performance enhancing drugs.
Since previous tests were negative then the most probable explanation is that the original tests did not cover the drug that they have now found.

They are trying to get the message across to the athletes that just because you can evade detection on the day, don't think you wont be found out later on.
By selecting high profile athletes for retesting it sends a very loud and clear message to the rest not to try it.
In that respect I think it's a good idea.
It's not fair to those who are doing the right thing if they end up on the day having to compete with a drug laboratory.

mineral1
mineral1
WA
4564 posts
WA, 4564 posts
25 Aug 2012 12:55pm
pweedas said...

mineral1 said...

pweedas said...

It looks like the lesson is, you can be good at something but don't be too good at it.

I'm sort of comparing this with a local footballer who was good at it.
Some people said he must be on drugs.
The better he got at it, the more people said it.
Eventually they were all proved right.
Now he doesn't play football anymore.

If Lance was taking anything illegal I find it hard to believe that he would be sharing that little secret with his team.


You have got to be pulling the pizz here, if you are talking of the AFL, ex West Coast player.
If you believe that the gear he was reputed to be on, enhanced his performance, then one would have to believe there are green men on mars. His habit comprised recreational gear not performance enhancing as reputed about Armstrong.
Recreational gear didn't improve Johnsey from the Newcastle Nights either, but why let facts get in the way of a good beat up A



There's very little difference in the ability of players at that level The thing that makes a good player into a brilliant player is the mental attitude on the day. In fact on the hour.
If you think you are invincible and you can fly then your ordinary performance can be a brilliant performance.
Some drugs do exactly that.




Surely you're not trying to advise all here, that recreational drugs will enhance performance on the day... surly not. If you have been advised that this is the case, you have received conflicting advice. Recreational wont enhance performance either on the day, or otherwise. In fact it has the direct negative affect on performance.
pweedas
pweedas
WA
4642 posts
WA, 4642 posts
25 Aug 2012 3:49pm
mineral1 said...

pweedas said...

mineral1 said...

pweedas said...

It looks like the lesson is, you can be good at something but don't be too good at it.

I'm sort of comparing this with a local footballer who was good at it.
Some people said he must be on drugs.
The better he got at it, the more people said it.
Eventually they were all proved right.
Now he doesn't play football anymore.

If Lance was taking anything illegal I find it hard to believe that he would be sharing that little secret with his team.


You have got to be pulling the pizz here, if you are talking of the AFL, ex West Coast player.
If you believe that the gear he was reputed to be on, enhanced his performance, then one would have to believe there are green men on mars. His habit comprised recreational gear not performance enhancing as reputed about Armstrong.
Recreational gear didn't improve Johnsey from the Newcastle Nights either, but why let facts get in the way of a good beat up A



There's very little difference in the ability of players at that level The thing that makes a good player into a brilliant player is the mental attitude on the day. In fact on the hour.
If you think you are invincible and you can fly then your ordinary performance can be a brilliant performance.
Some drugs do exactly that.




Surely you're not trying to advise all here, that recreational drugs will enhance performance on the day... surly not. If you have been advised that this is the case, you have received conflicting advice. Recreational wont enhance performance either on the day, or otherwise. In fact it has the direct negative affect on performance.



I'm not an expert on drugs because I'm not into them. I know various studies have shown that constant drug use does not improve physical ability. But I am also aware of studies that show that some drugs as simple as caffeine do improve physical performance for a short period.
They do so by giving the person a heightened awareness of their surroundings and the ability to make the most of their talents to deal with it.
Caffeine is the most popular one and it's cheap and mostly legal.
There are others which are more effective, less cheap and not so legal.
After all, that's why some clubbers like taking them, so they can party all night and apear something better than the dropkicks that they really are.

Coincidentally, there were recent decisions on how much caffeine could be in a sports persons blood before they were considered to be drug cheats.
There were extensive studies done on this and published.

And also,.... STOP CALLING ME SHIRLEY!

DUDE
DUDE
NSW
1132 posts
NSW, 1132 posts
25 Aug 2012 9:34pm
Lance Armstrong hasn't got the "Balls" to tell the truth.

getfunky
getfunky
WA
4485 posts
WA, 4485 posts
26 Aug 2012 10:19am
My theory is he had a small pocket of 'donated' urine tucked away in a fake knacker sack and plumbed in.

Actually it is possible.. the cycling world is nutz IMO.

They are ALL on the juice. Accept it and then it's an even playing field.

Thinking anything else is crackers.

Or have I made a balls-up of this issue?
NotWal
NotWal
QLD
7436 posts
QLD, 7436 posts
26 Aug 2012 1:24pm
mineral1 said...
Surely you're not trying to advise all here, that recreational drugs will enhance performance on the day... surly not. If you have been advised that this is the case, you have received conflicting advice. Recreational wont enhance performance either on the day, or otherwise. In fact it has the direct negative affect on performance.


Yes, they seem to be exceeding their brief proscribing the use of drugs that are not performance enhancing. They may be illegal but that has nothing to do with playing football.

I guess they are just trying to clean up the common image of footballers as louts and party boys.
Elroy Jetson
Elroy Jetson
WA
706 posts
WA, 706 posts
2 Sep 2012 9:03pm
Lance's elaborate scam revealed:

www.theaustralian.com.au/nocookies?a=A.flavipes

Ted the Kiwi
Ted the Kiwi
NSW
14256 posts
NSW, 14256 posts
3 Sep 2012 8:35am
Nice find Elroy....I have just pre-ordered that book - looks like it will be a good read.
Ted the Kiwi
Ted the Kiwi
NSW
14256 posts
NSW, 14256 posts
12 Oct 2012 9:44am
Last week I finished the Tyler Hamilton book The Secret Race and then in the last 24hrs the release of USADA findings leave no doubt in my mind that he was a cheating pri*k. Who knows where to for cycling from here......maybe they do need to do a truth session and then get on with it....a good read here if you are interested.

www.smh.com.au/sport/cycling/i-was-wrong-and-others-must-come-clean-too-20121011-27fr9.html
gibberjoe
gibberjoe
SA
956 posts
SA, 956 posts
12 Oct 2012 10:12am
Americians and Sport, the two words should never be used in the same sentence.....There be only one winner to any event,Yanks. Just remember the Admirals cup debarcle.126 year dominance thru rerigging the rules, untill Aussie Bond and now Aussie Cadell, the only true cyclist
Scotty88
Scotty88
4214 posts
4214 posts
12 Oct 2012 7:58am
Love him or hate him he raised $500 million for charity.
tmurray
tmurray
WA
485 posts
WA, 485 posts
12 Oct 2012 8:07am
I'm really disappointed about this - I wanted to believe he was innocent. Not so much for him - but if Lance is guilty and got away with it for so long - then, well, probably so was everyone from that era. I STILL want to believe cycling is a valid sport.
He's still a remarkable athlete and person - it certainly wasn't the drugs alone that won him 7 TDF's. His charity work is remarkable and hugely valuable to many people with cancer - is this all now worthless?
Who will they give the titles to - is there anyone left who is not under suspicion? Does he have to give back his prize money. What about his team mates?
And how incredibly skilled (and dishonest) must his team doctors be - to get a whole team through a systematic doping scheme for so many years. You'ld think these guys could do something remarkable if they used their talents for good instead of evil!
Please Register, or first...
Topics Subscribe Reply

Return To Classic site 😭
Or... let us know if a problem, so we can tweak! 😅