What? No Lance doping thread yet?

Well, there is now. Go!

It’s obvious that spectators would like to see some sort of fair competition. i mean, nothing is actually fair in that everyone starts with different sets of genetic gifts regarding their physical and mental state, but cheating is cheating, and right now the rules are pretty clear regarding drug use in sports.

I’m not really surprised by any of this. Anyone who’s followed cycling has probabaly suspected that Lance has doped for years, and the reason this is a big story is because he’s been such an enormous figure in cycling, in America, and has essentially been the public face of cancer awareness for the past decade. It will be interesting to see how it shakes out…

As early as 1993, Armstrong’s testing data as a member of Team USA was aberrational. As SI reported in January, USA Cycling sent a request to the UCLA Olympic Analytical Laboratory in 1999 for past test results – testosterone-epitestosterone ratios – for a cyclist identified only by his drug-testing code numbers. A source with knowledge of the request says that the cyclist was Armstrong. The lab responded, detailing the cyclist’s test results from 1991 to 1998, with one missing season: 1997, the only year during that span in which Armstrong didn’t compete. Three results – a 9.0-to-1 ratio in 1993, a 7.6-to-1 in 1994 and 6.5-to-1 in 1996 – were abnormally high. Most people have a ratio of 1-to-1. Before 2005, any ratio above 6.0-to-1 was considered abnormally high and evidence of doping; in 2005 that ratio was lowered to 4.0-to-1. But the high ratios had not led to sanctions. The lab wrote that it had been unsuccessful in attempting to confirm two of the abnormal results, and the third was not mentioned. All of the tests were reported as negative. According to sources familiar with the federal investigation, the government has obtained a copy of the T/E ratio letter first reported by SI.

taken from here - Was Lance Armstrong too big to fail? - SI.com - Magazine

look at the pic, pretty sure he’s saying “Hey Hamilton, wanna go smash some EPO later?? wwooooooooooo”

I was a bit surprised myself, thanks for setting things right.

I’m not sure what to think. I mean, I’m totally sure that Lance and his whole crew and possibly the whole peloton were doping. I’m totally sure that Clenbutador is as dirty as a really dirty thing. But I really want to think that someone out there is clean and racing well through pure talent; as it is I’m not sure we’ll ever know.

who’s lance?

well there’s definitely a lot of “he said this, he said that”…

In line to receive Tyler Hamilton’s gold medal, Viatcheslav Ekimov is in no mood to celebrate - The Washington Post

this guy may have a reason to dislike hamilton though, seeing as he was robbed of a gold medal at the time.

i’m with you heavymetal, be nice if you could be certain that someone had the talent without the doping, but i really doubt it unfortunately.

I’m a bit confused with the coverage of this at the moment.
Like what’s the next step- an official investigation or something?

(As an aside, one of the first articles about Lance in Google News is a Sports Illustrated one. Back in the day SI Photo used to have good information about configuring dSLRs for shooting college basketball, and artificially lit live action in general. A shame it hasn’t been updated!)

Will the UCI dare take back his titles? and if it was protecting him, why wasn’t money allocated for buying off potential whistleblowers?

It’s already in front of a grand jury in the US, they’re going after Lance for fraud, drug trafficking etc while he was riding for USPostal, and therefore was using govt money. Floyd and Tyler have gone public after their GJ testimonies, but Hincapie and others will probably hold their tongues until the ax comes down on Lance in a more public manner.

this article indicates that the USADA may start their own investigation if the US Attorney abandon their own investigation…

Lance Armstrong Tour de France titles could be in jeopardy - The Washington Post

make sure you read page 2, i didn’t notice there was a page 2 the first time!!

the USADA has the power to strip armstrong of his medals and earnings, even after the event.

wonder how much money he has, and how much of that would be considered “earnings”…

edit - also what hm said

the fallout is potentially massive when it comes to his ‘charity’ (the only charity in the history of mankind where legal fees are more than program expenses?)

only the hardcore chamois sniffers will survive the (possible) revelation that the leader of the cult has been lying to them all along just to get their money

source or was that speculation?

This is kicking around the netz at the mo: “In 2009 Livestrong spent $15,377,233 on legal fees & salaries vs $11,775,916 paid out to grants & programs.”

And Livestrong rates really poorly on transparency. Then there’s Livestrong.org (the charity) vs Livestrong.com (for profit). It’s all pretty blurry and messy.

Interesting, very interesting… doesn’t help his story does it

I quite like this one from the onion: Lance Armstrong Wants To Tell Nation Something But Nation Has To Promise Not To Get Mad | The Onion Sports Network

Yeh, it’s all a massive shitfight. As Alex said, there’ll be a pretty big fallout with regards to his charity if any actual conviction gets recorded. A lot of people seriously see him as some sort of messiah figure (just have a look at some pro-lance forums) and won’t be too happy to find out that all their hope was based on a fraud. On top of that, it’s a fraud that’s made Lance incredibly rich, and influential in the public and private sector (South Australia anyone?).

The thing which irks me is the statement. I’ve never tested positive for PEDs, 500 tests blah blah…

I don’t think he has ever come out and said I’ve never taken PEDs… So you’ve never been caught?

poll: there is more conjecture/misinformation/disinformation/conspiracy surrounding LA hittin’ the needles than there is surrounding the ‘death’ of osama bin laden.


ps, i realise there’s this whole thing with the courts now, but really, did anyone ever believe he did it so successfully, for so long (winning that is), that he wasn’t getting a little too much help from his ‘nutritionist’?

^as someone that’s only really been interested in cycling for a few years now, i never gave it a huge amount of thought

IIRC there’s a thinly-veiled reference in one of ‘his’ books (the first one?) about never having used any substance that was ‘…illegal at the time…’. Read one way it’s kind of suggesting that he was staying one step ahead of the regulators?

FWIW I’d take no pleasure in seeing him found guilty, I’m still a fan of the fairytale.

Never liked him, always despised him, he took away sweet, sweet victory from Ullrich, the true God of cycling who ate whatever he wanted and never smiled.

Try him, hang him from the yard arm, don’t care. The fact that he doped doesn’t bother me, they all did, it’s the fact that he was so god damn holier than thou the entire time, blasting others when they were caught, and generally being a dick.

Also, he looks kinda like a shark when he time trials.