General

Reddit seems to be all over the new news.  I thought I would help us beat a dead horse today after renewing my annual membership as a family membership this year...

 

http://www.reddit.com/r/bicycling/comments/11mkpx/lance_steps_down_from_livestrong/

 

 

 

Oh man, it's supposed to be an animated gif.  I'm so disappointed it only shows the first frame.  

Mark, Thank you for the link, it pretty much tells the rest of the story. RC

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/six-former-armstrong-usps-teammates-receive-bans-from-usada

No where in the two stories I read did it mention any suspension of any type for the testifiers. Where did you read that? RC

They were all suspended for 6 months. That's the way the system works. plea bargain. Lance had his chance to confess and he held his ground. There comes a time to pay the piper.
HIncapie was the key.

After reading some of the leaked evidence/testimony against Lance, it appears that Lance did in fact do what everyone else was doing, that is engage in some type of doping. In an effort to keep all things fair, I would expect to read next that the USADA will now suspend and ban all of the other cyclists, team managers and team directors that testified that they all took part in the "Most sophisticated, professionalized, and successful doping program the sport has ever seen." These cyclists/ex-cyclists include :Frankie Andreu, Michael Barry, Tom Danielson, Levi Leipheimer, Stephen Swart, Christian Vande Velde, Jonathan Vaughters, David Zabriskie, George Hincapie. OF course, Tyler Hamilton, and Floyd Landis. If in fact no action is taken against these people, what does that say about the USADA? RC

I've bit my tongue on this topic but this post from espn sums up my feelings EXACTLY.
Bottom line: 1.) He never failed a test, but 2.) many of his teammates say he doped, and 3.) it's old news...time to move on. The last sentence says it all, "Rather than investing so much money and effort chasing an athlete from the previous decade, perhaps we should be more focused on catching the current cheats."

From http://espn.go.com/olympics/

What good comes of Armstrong decision?
Good! The U.S. Anti-Doping Agency finally got that bad, bad Lance Armstrong. Now, I hope they’ll finally go after Babe Ruth for all those beers he drank during Prohibition.

I am no Lance apologist, but I am an avid cyclist and cycling fan, and frankly, I wonder what good can result from USADA’s decision Thursday night to strip him of his seven yellow jerseys. Three of those Tour de France victories came a decade or more ago, while the most recent was seven years ago. That's so long ago it would have been considered ancient history even in the pre-Twitter world.

It’s not like taking away Lance’s victories will correct a past injustice. With the rampant use of performance-enhancers, we cannot automatically say the second-place finisher each year rode clean (yes, Jan Ullrich, I’m talking about you). In fact, combine this latest decision with all the Floyd Landis, Alberto Contador, Ullrich, Bjarne Riis, Operation Puerto scandals/mia culpas, and as far as I can tell, no one actually won the Tour de France from 1996 to 2007. The cyclists rode 20,000 miles and climbed countless mountains to exhaustion for no reason whatsoever. Tour de France announcers Phil Liggett and Paul Sherwen should have spent those 12 Julys at the beach instead.

There are two reasons why cyclists are busted so often for performance-enhancers: One, they obviously use them to excel in a sport that demands they race more than 100 miles a day for three weeks during the biggest stage races. The other reason is that, like track and field, cycling actually tries hard to catch the cheaters by testing them repeatedly. You can even be banned just for not letting people know where you are on a given day (2007 Tour de France leader Michael Rasmussen was dropped by his team for that very reason). Get caught doping and you can be banned anywhere from several years to life.

This is unlike American team sports, especially football, where the players grow ever bigger, faster and stronger despite assurances that they are regularly tested. And even if they are caught, the players miss as little as four games. And fans prefer it that way. They don’t want a sport’s biggest names regularly banned -- particularly if they have them on their fantasy teams.

That’s what concerns me most about the fallout from this latest Lance decision. I don’t worry about the sport, but I worry for the fans, specifically the potential fans that will be lost.

Lance’s Tour success inspired many Americans, myself included, to get on their bikes and ride. Forget about his considerable work in raising funds for cancer research (I think we still will all treat cancer as a serious issue regardless of what happens to a bicyclist), Lance also turned many of us onto cycling and got us hooked on a healthier lifestyle. Thursday night’s news will not stop us from riding or from following races. But what about those potential fans who will be turned away from cycling and never get on a bike to experience the joys and health rewards of the sport (not to mention the gas-saving benefits)?

On the one hand, these intense testing programs are necessary to keep the competitive playing field at least semi-level. On the other hand, the sport eventually winds up eating itself, turning every single one of its athletes into a suspect, making all top performances suspicious and driving away potential fans to other sports.

Don’t get me wrong. I’m not saying that we should not test. I applaud baseball for cracking down -- the recent Melky Cabrera and Bartolo Colon bans are proof the sport takes testing seriously -- and appreciate that home run and other batting statistics have returned to the norm.

We must test. But we also must draw a line somewhere. And going after athletes for something they might have done seven to 13 years ago clearly crosses that line. Stripping Lance of his titles does far more harm than good. USADA should have let this one go. The agency exists to police sports, not destroy them.

Rather than investing so much money and effort chasing an athlete from the previous decade, perhaps we should be more focused on catching the current cheats.

I'm out'a here.Hope you are all on my jury when I get charged for something I did. I will be off scott free. Mucho bueno, por favor !

So after reading some of what Tyler Hamilton had to say in his "New book" due to be released in a couple of days, even I must admit that Lance Armstrong was a cheat and a liar. (Granted I am taking a liar and cheaters word for it). Here's the question, is the USADA going to strip the other 8 guys that Hamilton purportedly names of all of the Olympic medals, prize winnings, trophies? After all the USADA claims to have testimony from 10 of Armstrong's ex-teammates that they did PEDS, EPO with Lance Armstrong. Or is it just the admitted liars and drug takers who are summoned by the USADA that cooperate are given a free pass? All things being equal as the USADA claims, I would expect to see those other 9 witnesses named and consequently stripped. Do you think the reason George Hincappie retired this season was because he was told to? I heard George say in an interview that he hoped to stay around cycling in a management capacity, does the USADA let admitted drug users and cheats mange and own a cycling team like George presently does? One last thought, you do realize Lance did all of those other admitted cheaters and liars the USADA was going to have testify against Lance a favor when Lance, said mo mas? Those other 9 would of had to say they did PED's and EPO with Lance, thereby publicly ruining any further career in the cycling world, not to mention the fact that they would of had to forfeit any prizes, money etc. Bottom line for me: I still love cycling, I still love to watch bicycle races, tours, I still have favorite young riders that I like to follow in a clean pro cycling tour., RC

I compared the logic of hearsay not the crimes. If many people start to accuse someone of something then the window of doubt is opened. We are not talking one person making the accusation but many. Under your logic, everyone is innocent because human accusations are just hearsay. Really, seeing someone doing drugs is hearsay? When does it become one become a witness as opposed it just being hearsay? Should all witnesses not be allowed to testify.
Facts are most of the peloton was doping was doping, but somehow the guy who blew everyone away was not. Really? And for those who say so what so did everyone else. Fine but now that makes him one hell of a liar and with the other logic that dopers who lie have tainted credibility then Lance has no credibility and you must distain him as much as Tyler and Landis.

With the logic of hearsay, that means all child molesters should never be convicted. I guarantee that everyone of those kids lied at one time in their life. I guess anything they say cant be trusted.
I always find it interesting the cult of personality. We stand by our heroes at all costs. And as far as Lance being a good gut that is hearsay. 90% of all info is hearsay. Don't forget that a lot of riders were tested over and over and never tested positive, Bjarne Riis, Vaughters, Ullrich and so on. They admitted to it. Now that they admitted it does that mean what ever they say can't be trusted. I saw lance bully a rider out of break. Tthat was when I jumped off the fan wagon and I was driving it after seeing him in person win the tour in 1999.
Remember LAnce makes most of his money from Livestrong now and no money goes to research since 2006. The one great thing the LAF does provide is a hotline for people dealing with cancer and offers great info on a variety of treatments. But then again lots of volunteers do much of the work for free, they are true heroes.
One last thing this is not a criminal case where the law applies. The usada has a job to do and if it turns out that Lance was warned ahead of time they he was going to be tested then that opens things up because he recieved an unfair advantage. Wait for al the evidence then you can make a decision. Hincapie is the big one. If he turned then the shit hits the fan.

Can you say "Hear say"

PS I will continue to wear my LIVESTRONG bibs.  I'm agnostic to this whole thing and think Lance is a legend in his own right.  Good for him for giving up and not engaging in a legal battle that would have cost him his fortunes.

Regardless of the tests, what is it?  10 people said he was using stuff.  It's water under the bridge at this point, but I think it's pretty clear that there was some funny business going on if 10 people close to Lance are willing to make sworn statements that they had some kind of intimate knowledge that he was using something.  

 

From a legal standpoint, Lance is just as innocent as OJ Simpson. 

 

since when is anyone guilty because of some other persons version of the story. and serriously, tyler hamilton? not exactly someone who can be trusted.

I dont think there is enough to prove it either way ... who cares, Lance is a good person and is doing important work. Support him for that.

Way to go Rick Conway! Extremely well said my friend. I believe in Lance Too. I believe in everything Lance has done for cycling in this country, and I believe in everything he has done, and is continuing to do, for the whole cancer awareness movement.

My only flaw in this discussion is that, because I love cycling so much, I will ALWAYS take the side of a fellow cyclist. Always. And, of course, it makes it that much easier for me to do so when, as you've so eloquently pointed out, Lance has never failed a single test.

Thank you Lance for being the great person that you are. Thank you R C for your spot-on comments. And thank you RWBTC for allowing us this platform from which to exercise our rights to free speech.


CUL8R!

Siegfried