Lance Armstrong to be stripped of Tour de France titles and banned for life

[Dave Cooper please]

I think that's why he says stuff like "I played by the rules that were put in place by the UCI, WADA and USADA when I raced." ... rather than, "I never took anything".  Basically because he DID abide by the rules that said you couldn't go over a certain amount of a testable substance.

So he doped then? Just not enough to be caught.

Anyway, there's still the questions over the alleged tests that he did fail but mysteriously the B samples disappeared, and the alleged bribery of officials, and the blind eye UCI may or may not have turned to keep their biggest star in the TDF. Not saying any of this will be proven but I'd rather see the evidence first.
Oh and the secretary of US Postal who has more than once said that she saw the team doping, including Armstrong.
And the bullying of riders like Phillipe Rolland who were hounded out of racing by Sir Lance for daring to speak out about how it was impossible to compete on a level playing field because most of the Peleton were doping.
Etc.

The USADA is an embarassment though ... They are basically just trying to throw their weight around and have gone on a multi-year vendetta against a single guy for no apparent reason.

No apparent reason???
He may have cheated and took performance enhancing drugs to win one of the biggest sporting events in The World - seven times! That seems a good enough reason to me.

I don't see how they can strip his Tours away ... and they shouldn't.  Especially since Riis, Ullrich, Pantani and Contador all still have their titles ... and they've actually failed tests.

Now this I agree with. Not that Armstrong shouldn't lose his titles, but that all the other cheats should as well.

[Dave Cooper please]

But Landis failed a drugs test.

Armstrong is almost certainly the most tested cyclist in history but has never failed a test.  Given how many successful cyclists have failed tests I find it astonishing that he could have been doping for as long as USADA assert yet hasn't failed a single one.

That's even more implausible than his success.

They may have found more than one, it's apparently part of the evidence we could soon see.
I have mentioned above why Landis failed a test, he was stupid and desperate.

[Ad@m]

Anyway, there's still the questions over the alleged tests that he did fail but mysteriously the B samples disappeared, and the alleged bribery of officials, and the blind eye UCI may or may not have turned to keep their biggest star in the TDF. Not saying any of this will be proven but I'd rather see the evidence first.

No apparent reason???
He may have cheated and took performance enhancing drugs to win one of the biggest sporting events in The World - seven times! That seems a good enough reason to me.

But, just as with the USADA, all you are stating are theories and rumours.  What happened to the concept of innocent until proven guilty?

Do you think that Chinese swimmer in the Olympics should be stripped of her gold?  Her victory was completely unpredicted and the speed she swam considering her age was implausible.  Oh, and it's been suggested that she's on drugs.  By the USADA's apparent standards that's enough evidence to convict her isn't it?

[lazy villain]

When Wiggin's was being asked why this years Tour had been less dramatic than other years his response was that the sport is pretty much clean now, so you don't get riders doing things that seem extraordinary. As much as I wanted Armstrong to be found innocent (more for his place as a role model than his achievements), if you watch the footage of some of his performances now it does look superhuman. 

[Dave Cooper please]

But, just as with the USADA, all you are stating are theories and rumours.  What happened to the concept of innocent until proven guilty?

This hasn't been the case for drugs in sport for years.
Miss a drugs test for any reason whatsoever and you are warned, miss two and it's a ban, however innocent you may be.
Fail to answer charges that you took performance enhancing drugs then you are presumed guilty.
That's the way it is, and to be fair I prefer it that way.

Do you think that Chinese swimmer in the Olympics should be stripped of her gold?  Her victory was completely unpredicted and the speed she swam considering her age was implausible.  Oh, and it's been suggested that she's on drugs.  By the USADA's apparent standards that's enough evidence to convict her isn't it?

No, you are (as you often are) being disingenuous. Only incredulous onlookers and the media became sceptical. She was immediately tested (as were all medalists) and I assume the tests were negative. If someone comes up with some evidence that she took drugs (like what the USADA say they have got against Armstrong) then I hope it is investigated and she is stripped of her medal if she runs away and fails to answer to the charges.

[Ad@m]

She was immediately tested (as were all medalists) and I assume the tests were negative.

But you're saying that in Armstrong's case that is irrelevant.

[danlanza]

Lance is innocent until proven guilty, and he will never be proven guilty.
The people out to discredit him have a further agenda and as for the "Team wide doping " Allegation,that is just hard to believe because why were the rest of the team not proved possitive for drugs. In my view it is an attack on a top class athlete. Alberto Contador has served his ban, for eating the wrong food and taking the wrong medication FFS and is doing very well in the Vuelta in Spain and is CLEAN from any shite. Doping bans are seriously open to criticism.

[Dave Cooper please]

She was immediately tested (as were all medalists) and I assume the tests were negative.

But you're saying that in Armstrong's case that is irrelevant.

No, I'm saying that USADA say they have evidence that proves that Armstrong was into blood doping and took performance enhancing drugs. (They also say they have evidence that he may actually have failed some tests).
If the IOC subsequently find reason to question the Chinese swimmer's negative tests then I would expect it to be investigated.

[Ad@m]

If someone comes up with some evidence that she took drugs (like what the USADA say they have got against Armstrong) then I hope it is investigated and she is stripped of her medal if she runs away and fails to answer to the charges.

Also, if this was outside the world of doping in sports, and was, say, a government trumping up charges against an activist, saying they've got evidence but not actually sharing that evidence with anyone, you'd be the first one to say that it was out of order, and rightly so.

[Dave Cooper please]

Lance is innocent until proven guilty, and he will never be proven guilty.
The people out to discredit him have a further agenda and as for the "Team wide doping " Allegation,that is just hard to believe because why were the rest of the team not proved possitive for drugs.

*sigh*
Some of his team, and a lot of the cyclists competing at the same time as Armstrong have since admitted doping despite never being caught. Tests were not as good, certain drugs were not tested for, limits were set far too high for certain substances found naturally in the body but that can give a boost when injected in unnatural amounts, have you read the thread?

Oh, and what 'further agenda' could they have against a National hero and a brilliant fundraiser for cancer charities?

[Dave Cooper please]

If someone comes up with some evidence that she took drugs (like what the USADA say they have got against Armstrong) then I hope it is investigated and she is stripped of her medal if she runs away and fails to answer to the charges.

Also, if this was outside the world of doping in sports, and was, say, a government trumping up charges against an activist, saying they've got evidence but not actually sharing that evidence with anyone, you'd be the first one to say that it was out of order, and rightly so.

Again, you are being disingenuous.
There's a difference and you know it.
Besides, USADA are going to show us the evidence, so we'll soon see if they are 'trumped up' won't we?

[Ad@m]

If someone comes up with some evidence that she took drugs (like what the USADA say they have got against Armstrong) then I hope it is investigated and she is stripped of her medal if she runs away and fails to answer to the charges.

Also, if this was outside the world of doping in sports, and was, say, a government trumping up charges against an activist, saying they've got evidence but not actually sharing that evidence with anyone, you'd be the first one to say that it was out of order, and rightly so.

Again, you are being disingenuous.
There's a difference and you know it.
Besides, USADA are going to show us the evidence, so we'll soon see if they are 'trumped up' won't we?

I'm not being disingenuous at all.  I'm merely pointing out certain inconsistencies.

There's a difference in the scale but not in the principle.  Neither of us can imagine the effort Lance Armstrong put in to become the most successful cyclist there has ever been and has spent over a decade defending himself against a governmental body, with the emotional and financial strain that brings, to the point where he feels he cannot win, despite no evidence whatsoever that he's guilty being made public.

And if USADA are going to show us this overwhelming evidence why haven't they shown it yet?

[Dave Cooper please]

And if USADA are going to show us this overwhelming evidence why haven't they shown it yet?

How many times have you missed the bit where I say "they are going to" now?!
It was only today that Armstrong decided not to bother answering, maybe they want to give him time to change his mind and not be labelled a drug cheat, I dunno.

They have collated the evidence and wanted Armstrong to answer the charges, that was supposed to be when we heard the evidence. You know, like a court case, how often do we get to hear the prosecution's evidence against a defendant before the court case?

[danlanza]

Lance is innocent until proven guilty, and he will never be proven guilty.
The people out to discredit him have a further agenda and as for the "Team wide doping " Allegation,that is just hard to believe because why were the rest of the team not proved possitive for drugs.

*sigh*
Some of his team, and a lot of the cyclists competing at the same time as Armstrong have since admitted doping despite never being caught. Tests were not as good, certain drugs were not tested for, limits were set far too high for certain substances found naturally in the body but that can give a boost when injected in unnatural amounts, have you read the thread?

Oh, and what 'further agenda' could they have against a National hero and a brilliant fundraiser for cancer charities?

*sigh* ALSO MATE. A can of coca cola,red bull,lucozade can put you in dangerous terrortory if you are a Proffesional Athlete, So go and *Sigh your Ass of*

[Ad@m]

And if USADA are going to show us this overwhelming evidence why haven't they shown it yet?

How many times have you missed the bit where I say "they are going to" now?!
It was only today that Armstrong decided not to bother answering, maybe they want to give him time to change his mind and not be labelled a drug cheat, I dunno.

They have collated the evidence and wanted Armstrong to answer the charges, that was supposed to be when we heard the evidence. You know, like a court case, how often do we get to hear the prosecution's evidence against a defendant before the court case?

This has been going on for years.  It's another implausibility that USADA are still just talking about evidence they claim to have and that none of this is in the public domain by now.