Lance Armstrong will be stripped of his seven Tour titles

[milohimself]

IMO it's still impressive given that everybody he beat was doing the same damn thing, and he's been a godsend to his own little corner of philanthropy raising over half a billion, so I do respect him for that

 

[BigPapaVol]

IMO it's still impressive given that everybody he beat was doing the same damn thing, and he's been a godsend to his own little corner of philanthropy raising over half a billion, so I do respect him for that

he's an acehole, but was unquestionably the best at his gig in the world and was inspirational for many of the right reasons.

USADA and other similar regulator grandstanding is bullshiz. As inept of a group as there is in the world.

 

[milohimself]

he's an acehole, but was unquestionably the best at his gig in the world and was inspirational for many of the right reasons.

USADA and other similar regulator grandstanding is bullshiz. As inept of a group as there is in the world.

Yep, half a peg up from the french at best, if that

 

[vol_in_ar]

Their actually worse than the French...they actually accopmplished stripping him of his titles

 

[milohimself]

Their actually worse than the French...they actually accopmplished stripping him of his titles

No, lance did that. He could have dragged this out indefinitely and had the money and support to do so.

The only thing the usada proved is that it could win a war of attrition

 

[tri_vol]

he's an acehole, but was unquestionably the best at his gig in the world and was inspirational for many of the right reasons.

USADA and other similar regulator grandstanding is bullshiz. As inept of a group as there is in the world.

This. I dont think people realize USADA has their own arbitration court and the USADA record in their court is 58-2. If he continued the fight, that was the next stage. He was going to lose whether he was innocent or guilty. When he lost, USADA would say see we proved him guilty. He was in a no win situation.

 

[Vercingetorix]

Floyd Landis got caught & all he wanted to do was throw every person he could under the bus. Armstrong has been dealing with this for years because of hearsay. No physical evidence at all. He passed every drug test he was administered.

Supposedly they've got blood samples collected from Armstrong in 2009 and 2010 that are tainted.

A whole lot of ugliness was going to come out at a public hearing. Apparently Armstrong's Postal Service/Discovery teams were as organized and methodical at blood doping as they were everything else. If the reports that George Hincapie (who rode on Armstrong's team for all seven titles) was subpoenaed are true, then I can see why Armstrong would give up rather than face a public hearing. It's easy to destroy Floyd Landis's credibility. Not so with Big George.

 

[VolsNSkinsFan]

There is no chance that Armstrong was pure. Zero. I'd believe Roger Clemens was pure before I believed Armstrong.

Apparently they subpoened George Hincapie, who reluctantly testified that the whole team was doping the whole time. Hincapie is regarded universally as having an impeccable reputation by everyone in the whole sport.

Not sure what the point of stripping him of his titles is, though, since they would then go to other guys who were certainly doping too. All that is is grandstanding.

A government power trip, just like the rest of this administration

 

[n_huffhines]

No, lance did that. He could have dragged this out indefinitely and had the money and support to do so.

The only thing the usada proved is that it could win a war of attrition

This.

Guilty or not, I don't blame Lance for moving on with his life.

 

[govols/cc]

Supposedly they've got blood samples collected from Armstrong in 2009 and 2010 that are tainted.

A whole lot of ugliness was going to come out at a public hearing. Apparently Armstrong's Postal Service/Discovery teams were as organized and methodical at blood doping as they were everything else. If the reports that George Hincapie (who rode on Armstrong's team for all seven titles) was subpoenaed are true, then I can see why Armstrong would give up rather than face a public hearing. It's easy to destroy Floyd Landis's credibility. Not so with Big George.

It's still a persons word against another's. If a supposed tainted blood sample is a failed test it he is guilty if not leave the man alone.

 

[Vercingetorix]

It's still a persons word against another's. If a supposed tainted blood sample is a failed test it he is guilty if not leave the man alone.

Well, that's he reason Armstrong is suddenly throwing in the towel. The next step would be a public hearing where the evidence against him is unveiled, and he and his team of lawyers and PR guys have apparently decided that the best thing for his brand is to just walk away to prevent that hearing from happening.

One man's word against another is one thing. One man's word against a dozen former teammates is another. Add in some supposed blood samples that were tampered with and it's easy to see how airing the evidence could turn the US public, most of whom want to give Armstrong the benefit of the doubt, against him.

It's an ugly story all the way around; there are no good guys. It's a shame Armstrong didn't just stay retired and let it go.

 

[volfanbill]

Well, that's he reason Armstrong is suddenly throwing in the towel. The next step would be a public hearing where the evidence against him is unveiled, and he and his team of lawyers and PR guys have apparently decided that the best thing for his brand is to just walk away to prevent that hearing from happening.

One man's word against another is one thing. One man's word against a dozen former teammates is another. Add in some supposed blood samples that were tampered with and it's easy to see how airing the evidence could turn the US public, most of whom want to give Armstrong the benefit of the doubt, against him.

It's an ugly story all the way around; there are no good guys. It's a shame Armstrong didn't just stay retired and let it go.

that's a HUGE assumption. An astronomical one. Why jump to that conclusion over the fact that maybe he's just being honest and tired of having to fight this every day. I'd be ready to move on too if I were him. I'm never not amazed at your level of bias against things possibly being on the good side.

 

[tri_vol]

It's still a persons word against another's. If a supposed tainted blood sample is a failed test it he is guilty if not leave the man alone.

They don't have a tainted blood sample or smoking gun. They have his blood from 09 & 10. Comparing the two they say there are differences and thus make the assumption that he had blood transfusions during that time. No concrete evidence.

 

[Vercingetorix]

that's a HUGE assumption. An astronomical one. Why jump to that conclusion over the fact that maybe he's just being honest and tired of having to fight this every day. I'd be ready to move on too if I were him. I'm never not amazed at your level of bias against things possibly being on the good side.

I'm going to guess you don't actually watch cycling. They ride up the same mountains year after year in the Tour. The way that they know that they've finally just about got blood doping/PEDs under control is that the times across the board as so much slower now than they used to be. There's been a dramatic dropoff. It really is the case that either A) Armstrong was a complete sui generis superman, or B) Armstrong was "merely" the greatest cyclist in the world, competing against guys who were on a level playing field.

Everyone I know who watches pro cycling seriously enough that s/he can name a dozen cyclists off the top of his/her head went through the denial/doubt/acceptance cycle with Armstrong a few years ago. There's just too much. I think at this point you'll find more baseball fans who believe in the purity of Clemens and Bonds than you will cycling fans who think Armstrong was clean.

 

[MG1968]

regardless of whether he doped or not, he got to screw Sheryl Crow while she was still smokin' hot, and that's more than a lot of us can say

 

[VolsNSkinsFan]

I saw him and matthew mcconaughey sitting at the bar at Chops couple of years ago. They were both small dudes

 

[bleedorange0037]

I'm going to guess you don't actually watch cycling. They ride up the same mountains year after year in the Tour. The way that they know that they've finally just about got blood doping/PEDs under control is that the times across the board as so much slower now than they used to be. There's been a dramatic dropoff. It really is the case that either A) Armstrong was a complete sui generis superman, or B) Armstrong was "merely" the greatest cyclist in the world, competing against guys who were on a level playing field.

Everyone I know who watches pro cycling seriously enough that s/he can name a dozen cyclists off the top of his/her head went through the denial/doubt/acceptance cycle with Armstrong a few years ago. There's just too much. I think at this point you'll find more baseball fans who believe in the purity of Clemens and Bonds than you will cycling fans who think Armstrong was clean.

I'll concede that I know nothing about cycling, so what's really the point of taking his titles away? Are they going to simply hand them off to the guy who finished 2nd, who was no doubt doping as well? It would seem to me that the guys who were clean, if there even were any, would have been HOURS behind the winning time, not finishing in 2nd place.

 

[BigPapaVol]

Taking the titles away is as much about Armstrong's vocal piety and mudslinging for well over a decade as it is symbolic.

He beat all of the other dopers at the top of the sport. That he was one of the best ever won't be diminished. That he was a lying, bombastic turd won't be debated either.

 

[bleedorange0037]

Taking the titles away is as much about Armstrong's vocal piety and mudslinging for well over a decade as it is symbolic.

He beat all of the other dopers at the top of the sport. That he was one of the best ever won't be diminished. That he was a lying, bombastic turd won't be debated either.

So do you think they will actually give the titles to the runners-up, or just leave them vacant? It would seem kind of laughable to simply hand them off to another guy who was surely doping just to prove a point about Armstrong.

 

[BigPapaVol]

So do you think they will actually give the titles to the runners-up, or just leave them vacant? It would seem kind of laughable to simply hand them off to another guy who was surely doping just to prove a point about Armstrong.

Thats why this is a loser for the enforcement idiots. Everyone was doping.

 

[YankeeVol]

Honestly, does anyone really care? The stuff he's done for cancer is what's important.

 

[tri_vol]

I'm going to guess you don't actually watch cycling. They ride up the same mountains year after year in the Tour. The way that they know that they've finally just about got blood doping/PEDs under control is that the times across the board as so much slower now than they used to be. There's been a dramatic dropoff. It really is the case that either A) Armstrong was a complete sui generis superman, or B) Armstrong was "merely" the greatest cyclist in the world, competing against guys who were on a level playing field.

Everyone I know who watches pro cycling seriously enough that s/he can name a dozen cyclists off the top of his/her head went through the denial/doubt/acceptance cycle with Armstrong a few years ago. There's just too much. I think at this point you'll find more baseball fans who believe in the purity of Clemens and Bonds than you will cycling fans who think Armstrong was clean.

The course changes every year.

They aren't even close to having doping under control.

 

[tri_vol]

So do you think they will actually give the titles to the runners-up, or just leave them vacant? It would seem kind of laughable to simply hand them off to another guy who was surely doping just to prove a point about Armstrong.

The second place guy gets the titles. It is quite dumb.

 

[PKT_VOL]

As my dad puts it "Either he was the best rider at the time since everyone was doping and he still beat them, or he's the greatest athlete of all time if he's clean and beat every single one of them who was doping. You choose which one is more likely."

Your dad said it best.

 

[slh1089]

Supposedly they've got blood samples collected from Armstrong in 2009 and 2010 that are tainted.

A whole lot of ugliness was going to come out at a public hearing. Apparently Armstrong's Postal Service/Discovery teams were as organized and methodical at blood doping as they were everything else. If the reports that George Hincapie (who rode on Armstrong's team for all seven titles) was subpoenaed are true, then I can see why Armstrong would give up rather than face a public hearing. It's easy to destroy Floyd Landis's credibility. Not so with Big George.

I assume you are referring to the Dutch (I believe) report that came out during the Tour. These reports come out every year about some rider, and most prove to be flat out lies. That is paraphrasing Phill Ligget. Not saying that Armstrong is clean, but no positive tests his entire career as the most tested athlete in the history of sports should at least warrant him something.