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

[lovejoy]

An interesting point.

I think this is a consequence of the testing system being able to keep up with dopers and their products. Some substances don't occur naturally in the body like clenbuteral and so when tested if it was in your body you are guilty like Contador.

For EPO there was no definitive test and does occur naturally in the body, so the UCI set a 50% limit. Which meant unscrupulous riders felt they were free to take the jab to get to close to 50 and avoid breaking the barrier. This isn't the rules saying if your below 50 it's ok, it's about riders taking advantage of a unsophisticated testing system to their own ends. If a product is on the banned list and you ingest it even to below the allowed limits your are still cheating. Evidence points to Armstrong taking EPO to improve his performance and compete at the top level. This also explains why his claim of never failing a test is so hollow

[RunRickyRun]

Caffeine IS a banned substance but you would probably need to drink a dozen cases of the Red Bull to be over the limit, can't see that being particularly performance enhancing before a race!

I don't mean to dig up an old post, but I wanted to revisit this one ...

Caffeine isn't on the banned list now ... but it was before 2004.  So my question is this:  If it's 2003, and a cyclist takes so much as a small drink of coffee before a race, would you consider that doping?  If he drinks 6 Red Bulls, is that doping?  If he takes a package of caffeine pills and comes in just under the legal limit, is THAT doping?

I ask, because I'm pretty sure that's what's going on with most of this Armstrong "doping", as well as what's still going on today.  Is it the fault of the biker for ingesting anything on the list, regardless of how small ... or the fault of the governing bodies who say, "you can have so much of this in your system, just not THIS much"?  If you can't fault one guy for taking a small amount of a "banned" substance, because it's well below allowable limits anyway ... how can you fault a guy for taking enough of it to go right up to the limit?  Technically, he's still playing by the rules that the governing bodies set up.

EPO was always a banned substance - it's just that there was no test for it before the Sydney Olympics.

The UCI decided to impose a hematocrit limit to try and stop riders (for want of a better phrase) killing themselves with the drug. It certainly wasn't intended as a free for all but they thought this was the best way of handling a bad situation.

It's interesting to note that the entire US postal team turned up at the '99 tour with hematocrit levels between 49% and 50% (50% being the limit).

[RunRickyRun]

This from the BBC to confuse things further:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/cycling/19749763

It strikes me that politics seems to be the driver for a lot of the press statement rather than the search for truth.

Indeed.

It does seem quite odd though for a governing body of a sport to strip someone of their entire career's titles before they have the evidence to support it.

Ultimately it's not really up to the UCI.

The UCI are signed up to WADA. WADA have given jurisdiction to the case to USADA (who have stripped Armstrong of his titles).

I'd imagine the delay is probably down to the fact that Johan Bruyneel is currently contesting the charges brought against him (it seems the UCI have yet to grasp the fact that the world does not revolve around Armstrong).

[lovejoy]

I have just finished Tyler Hamiltons book and recommend it  to anyone wanting an honest insight into drugs culture in sport.
These guys were faxed with a choice of not doping and being also rans, eking out a living behind riders who were using and inferior or doping to compete at the top. I sympathise with these guys it was a horrible choice. I just wish they could get this truth and reconciliation up and running so Lance can tell us his real story.

[Dave Cooper please]

I have just finished Tyler Hamiltons book and recommend it  to anyone wanting an honest insight into drugs culture in sport.
These guys were faxed with a choice of not doping and being also rans, eking out a living behind riders who were using and inferior or doping to compete at the top. I sympathise with these guys it was a horrible choice. I just wish they could get this truth and reconciliation up and running so Lance can tell us his real story.

Yes, great book isn't it.
This is why I wish Armstrong would just come clean and admit he was doping just like everyone else.

A statement years ago along the lines of "Fuck yeah I doped, but everyone did, it was within UCI limits and it was the only way anyone could compete at the top level." would have, if not exonerated him, but at least made everyone understand what was going on in cycling at the time. I doubt it would have unduly affected his charity work and he would still have been the best cyclist in the World, albeit the best in a warped, drugged-up sport.

[bertlambshank]

Judgement has just been released its looks pretty damning.

[Jon Crofts]

The latest to fess up is George Hincapie.

http://www.georgehincapie.com/news/Statement-from-George-Hincapie/

This months Pro Cycling makes interesting reading with a timeline of what if's?  It points to things being a lot worse without Lance Armstrong.

[RunRickyRun]

Hincapie's evidence will be the most damning testimony. I think it will change public opinion in America decisively.

[Dante Lavelli]

A link to the BBC's summary of the judgement:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/cycling/19903716

[N'Rexy]

Michael Barry (ex Sky) just fessed up too.  Lance mate, its really really over now.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://www.scribd.com/doc/109619079/Reasoned-Decision


Boom.  This is dynamite.

[Jon Crofts]

 'Its not about the bike'  was Lance's first book, looks like he had a point.

[Dave Cooper please]

Told you!

[Ad@m]

Told you!

How very humble of you.

Did I say humble? I meant smug.

This is such a shame for the sport. I've got unbelievable respect for the guys who ride the Tour de France and to find that basically a decade of the sport meant nothing because of institutionalised doping is so depressing.

Today isn't a day to celebrate. Especially when you consider that the UK leads the world in cycling at the moment and this will once again make the general public think that cyclists can't be trusted.

I just hope this is as bad as it gets and that no Brits are involved in anything.

[Jon Crofts]

You did, still don't want to believe it though, especially that bastard Hincapie, he was another hero who just pissed on my chips.

[Dante Lavelli]

Told you!

Today isn't a day to celebrate. Especially when you consider that the UK leads the world in cycling at the moment and this will once again make the general public think that cyclists can't be trusted. 

I have mentioned this elsewhere but I'll plug it again.  The 4 part Sky documentary "The Road To Glory" is excellent.  Within it they are VERY proud to announce, on numerous occassions, that they are clean.  If they're lying they're putting every ounce of their reputations on the line.