Lance Armstrong/WTH???

It's a shame because he is a good man. He founded the livestrong foundation and has donated and contributed endlessly to the world around him. Even if he was truly innocent, I think that he and his family are just tired of battling the accusations and speculations. His carreer is coming to an end and he probably just wants it over with. Maybe this means Dark Rage pre-workout will be re-released, that stuff was serious.
 
Unless I am mistaken, it is noteworthy that there is not a shred of objective evidence that Armstrong used PEDs or blood doped. To the contrary, all of his testing, over a number of years, has consistently proven negative. I don't know whether he "cheated", and suspect that both he and all of the top riders have blood doped. But the real issue for me on this one is the presumption of guilt in the absence of any objective evidence. Thats scary, because tomorrow it could be you or me in some other arena of life. Additionally, I don't know how the USADA can strip Armstrong of wins which they never gave to him nor oversaw, but thats a separate issue. Ultimately, America will remember Armstrong as someone who beat cancer, won the Tour multiple times, and seems to be a decent enough guy. The rest will just fade away over the passage of years.
 
If Lance was innocent, that should have been his mantra to the end. Why throw in the towel?
 
In this case, the jury is also the accuser (the USADA). I don't know in inner workings of that process, but Armstrong indicated that he did not believe the process was objective. I generally believe that a criminal defendant should be presumed guilty when he does not testify in his own defense. But Armstrong is not a criminal, and nothing compels him to testify. He is basically giving the USADA the finger by walking away, and it seems to me that the USADA's purported stripping of his Tour titles will not change the public's correct perception that he did finish first in those events.
 
powernoodle said:
Unless I am mistaken, it is noteworthy that there is not a shred of objective evidence that Armstrong used PEDs or blood doped. To the contrary, all of his testing, over a number of years, has consistently proven negative. I don't know whether he "cheated", and suspect that both he and all of the top riders have blood doped. But the real issue for me on this one is the presumption of guilt in the absence of any objective evidence. Thats scary, because tomorrow it could be you or me in some other arena of life. Additionally, I don't know how the USADA can strip Armstrong of wins which they never gave to him nor oversaw, but thats a separate issue. Ultimately, America will remember Armstrong as someone who beat cancer, won the Tour multiple times, and seems to be a decent enough guy. The rest will just fade away over the passage of years.
Click to expand...

^Yup. The "evidence" that was to be provided during this most recent accusation was testimony from other cyclists (some that have admitted to, or were proven to be dopers) that Lance was doping. He passed every test given. Period. Now they are seeking slander and fale accustations from cyclists that Lance beat. Lance just gave up. Why spend the time and money to PROVE your innocence. Quite backwards. And no, the USADA cannot strip his Tour de France victories, however, since the French hated him, they'll probably follow suit.
 
Also of note is that he was receiving ongoing treatment for testicular cancer with brain mets during this time. Part of the regimen includes certain types of steroids and chemotherapeutic agents that either shut down production of red blood cells or severely compromise them. People often require blood transfusions as well as drugs that artificially stimulate white and/or red blood cell production. Sometimes the marrow take a long time to recover.
 
I don't see how they claim he doped when he passed every single test, but they have like 10 people swearing under oath that he cheated. If it was one or two I'd say it was just jealousy and bad blood, but there were a lot of people who said he was doping.

I wish I could care that he might have doped but I can't. Bicycling is the dirtiest of all the dirty sports. If they strip him of the title because he's a cheat, they'll just be giving the title to the next best cheater. I used to be amazed when watching the Tour de France because these guys were just machines going up the mountains. But really they were just all doped up, so I lost interest.

To me, he's raised a lot of money for cancer and done a lot of good, so that is more important to me.
 
Not testing positive is not the same as never having doped. The key in doping & chemical enhancements isn't getting your hands on them, it's in getting top medical assistance in figuring out ways to mask & not test positive.

I have read many (although not all) of Lance's comments about these claims, and he has always stated that he never tested positive for any performance-enhancing substances. I don't think I've ever read him make any claims that he was innocent, or that he never took any banned substances.

The USADA purportedly had lined-up 10 former racing associates who were ready to testify their direct knowledge in Lance's usage AND in his sell & administering doping agents to others.

Lance gave up because he had no legal method to prevent these testimonies from taking place. In this manner, he had the final say in this matter. Trying to fight this and have 10 cycling athletes giving testimony would have done far more damage to his long term memory.

If you are a champion that was accused of something that wasn't true, wouldn't you rather go down fighting?

Personally, I welcome all efforts to clean up abuse of performance enhancing drugs by all athletes.
 
Lance was the most drug tested athlete in the world. He passed them all. Every org. wants their turn at bat to try and destroy him. Wheres that spanish rider Contador that won the tour 2 times and was Lances teamate once? Oh yeah he was caught blood doping and is suspended and stripped of his win but Lance passed all of his tests even from french judges.
 
I would prefer sports to be rid of PEDs as well, but I am not sure if that is the specific issue here. If you follow all of the protocols relating to testing, come up clean on all administered tests, and make yourself available for each (as we hear he has done), why does the testimony of others suddenly take precedence over the testing procedures in place? If he had tested positive, but 10 team members came forward and said he didn't do it, would they have reversed a decision? I am not sure what he did or did not do, but the process seems to be skewed, at least to me....
 
IMO cycling is a dirtier sport than track and field from a doping perspective. Armstrong has done good off of the field. My understanding is that he never failed a test when he was active. But when the new testing methods are applied to his samples he comes up hot.

While I have an opinion, I really don't care.
 
I am reading the argument that it's OK since he didn't test positive.

I don't agree because he is cheating all the "clean" athletes out there who are trying to compete fairly. It's not like lying about your golf score to your friends, Lance has been taking a huge amount of money from a lot of companies and people based on activities which may not be legit.

This would not make sense if you applied it elsewhere: would embezzlement be OK if nobody gets caught?
 
@CWL--great points, and no one (intelligent) is disputing them. But, using your scenario, if person x is accused of embezzlement by 4 of his friends, yet comes up clean by the standards set forth by whatever governing body that business falls under....is he still guilty?
 
If, the 4 friends also admit that they were part of the embezzlement scheme and gave details of how the entire operation worked, I would say that there is plenty of guilt for everyone.
 
On the surface, that would seem to point to guilt but, the way our justice system is built, it is insufficient (to say the least). In no way am I pleading innocence for Lance; I would imagine he is guilty of something after winning so incredibly often in one of the dirtiest sports around. My point here is that even if the 4 friends have lots of details of how it all happenend, isn't it possible that they are guilty, and have merely inserted his name in the scheme? Just asking....
 
As a casual fan of the sport I don't think it looks good for Lance but I have no firm opinion one way or the other as nothing has been proven beyond reasonable doubt one way or the other. It's very sad because he has gone on to do a lot of good work through his success.

The bottom line is that only Lance truly knows if he is innocent or not.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top