Tell Me :
Talk
That's still the big question that nobody has answered yet.
They say because his scheme was so well organized.
-------------------
Keep On Rolling
The cheaters first dope themselves, then they take other things that makes the dope untraceable in tests. What fooled the drugtests back a couple of years ago won't fool them now.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-10-13 17:48 by Erik_Snow.
Saline solution.
The report makes it clear that a number of methods (primarily taking saline) were used to thwart testing because he and the rest of the postal team always had at least an hours notice of the 'random' testing.
Wrong: he has just been convinced of something. USADA has the power to convict someone and they have done it. What you are saying is as absurd as if, condemned in court for theft, I would say walking out of court: "I am innocent and was convicted of nothing" - oh wait, I was actually convicted just a minute ago...
You are joking, right ? You really have that much time ?
-------------------
Keep On Rolling
who knew that saline solution would be the solution? Is that ironic?
Certainly the recent LA Friday release comes to mind. Anyone else?
Lance Armstrong Friday doesn't excist in my Rolling Stones world!
Been Stoned since 1964 and still am!
They tested him... over and over and over... he passed them all.
And would Americans be so agitated if Armstrong was European.
I have no special knowledge, or even a strong opinion, on the guilt or innocence of Armstrong but you don't need a smoking gun, or even a body, to get a murder conviction so proving drug taking probably doesn't need a positive urine sample.
Also the quote from the Cycling Union is almost 2 months old. The current position is a little different.
UCI chief defiant despite Armstrong scandal
By Carol Huang (AFP) – 5 hours ago
BEIJING — World cycling chief Pat McQuaid insisted the sport had moved on from its murky past Saturday as the body comes under pressure to respond to doping evidence against Tour de France icon Lance Armstrong.
McQuaid admitted cycling had suffered "big damage" from the affair but he said better tests meant riders were now much cleaner than previous days, which are in focus since claims targeting Armstrong were released this week.
"The sport has moved on," the International Cycling Union (UCI) president told AFP at the Tour of Beijing. "The peloton today is completely different."
"There is big damage to the image of the sport, but the sport is going very well," he added.
Armstrong, who denies taking banned substances, is accused by the US Anti-Doping Agency (USADA) of being at the heart of "the most sophisticated, professionalised and successful doping programme" ever seen in sport.
The UCI is yet to respond to USADA's 1,000-page document, which raises questions about how Armstrong apparently managed to evade detection, and contains a claim that he paid a bribe to hush up a positive test.
The body is also yet to endorse or reject USADA's move to ban Armstrong from cycling for life and strip him of his Tour titles, a sanction that currently only has force in the United States.
"The UCI has received the dossier two days ago, 1,000 pages, and so our lawyers are studying that at the moment and we have 21 days to come up with a response," McQuaid said earlier this week.
He added: "It would be wrong of me to second guess or pre-empt what our lawyers might decide, so I'd wait until then. The UCI will wait until that work has been done and then the UCI will make a statement."
Because he was cheating.
Talk about your favorite band.
For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Re: OT : Lance Armstrong
Posted by:
Chris Fountain
()
Date: October 13, 2012 17:10
How did he pass all the urine/blood tests? Did he drink a bunch of water to dilute the chemicals if these allegations are true?
Re: OT : Lance Armstrong
Posted by:
Rolling Hansie
()
Date: October 13, 2012 17:14
Quote
Chris Fountain
How did he pass all the urine/blood tests?
That's still the big question that nobody has answered yet.
They say because his scheme was so well organized.
-------------------
Keep On Rolling
Re: OT : Lance Armstrong
Posted by:
Erik_Snow
()
Date: October 13, 2012 17:21
Quote
Rolling HansieQuote
Chris Fountain
How did he pass all the urine/blood tests?
That's still the big question that nobody has answered yet.
They say because his scheme was so well organized.
The cheaters first dope themselves, then they take other things that makes the dope untraceable in tests. What fooled the drugtests back a couple of years ago won't fool them now.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-10-13 17:48 by Erik_Snow.
Re: OT : Lance Armstrong
Posted by:
Koen
()
Date: October 13, 2012 17:42
Quote
Chris Fountain
How did he pass all the urine/blood tests? Did he drink a bunch of water to dilute the chemicals if these allegations are true?
Saline solution.
Re: OT : Lance Armstrong
Posted by:
ChefGuevara
()
Date: October 13, 2012 17:50
The new Tyler Hamilton book, "the secret race" gives and insight
of the complexity of the scheme. Not only where they doping, they
where doping better than any other team, with better doctors than
what the testers had. They where way ahead in the game.
The USADA reports claims that the "over 500 tests" that Armstrong claims
where really much less.
of the complexity of the scheme. Not only where they doping, they
where doping better than any other team, with better doctors than
what the testers had. They where way ahead in the game.
The USADA reports claims that the "over 500 tests" that Armstrong claims
where really much less.
Re: OT : Lance Armstrong
Posted by:
otonneau
()
Date: October 13, 2012 19:02
The vendetta-theory is so very ridiculous, who can buy it? What is it to USADA whether Armstrong, or Pantani, or Ulrich, wins the tour? What do they care??? You know the old axiom of detective films: look for a motive. What possible motives could have the anti-doping agency to destroy Armstrong? Jealousy, simply because he's rich and famous? Oh wait, then how come they don't attack each and every rich person on the planet? And how do we even know they are jealous? The reasoning is as follows: Armstrong IS innocent, therefore his attackers are the dishonest party, and since we have not a single motive for their assault, we assume it must be pure and basic jealousy. I'm sure there are a lot of rich and powerful people on Wall Street who just love this argument: anybody who question their wealth must be jealous, right? Silly silly silly...
And the fact that he passed tests proves nothing, as has been pointed above: the whole point of the report is not to deny that he passed tests but to show HOW he managed to cheat AND pass them. I've even read the report and the scientific evidence is obvioulsy damning.
The rule of the game is not: Don't fail tests. It is: Don't dope. Tests are attempts at enforcing this rule, but you are not forever off the hook if you pass a test. It was never said that the law (the LAW! USADA is not a bunch of loonies, they are a government agency appointed to fulfil a task!) could not use other methods to get the cheats. It is as silly as to say "if I steal but am not caught in the act, then I am innocent and later evidence cannot change it", which is insane. It equates justice to a sort of sport: catch me, or else you loose. That's not the rule. If you're a crook or a cheat or a murderer, you should know no peace because justice might always catch up with you, it has all the time in the world to do so and it is never too late to knock on your door and punish your sorry ass. THAT is justice.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-10-13 19:03 by otonneau.
And the fact that he passed tests proves nothing, as has been pointed above: the whole point of the report is not to deny that he passed tests but to show HOW he managed to cheat AND pass them. I've even read the report and the scientific evidence is obvioulsy damning.
The rule of the game is not: Don't fail tests. It is: Don't dope. Tests are attempts at enforcing this rule, but you are not forever off the hook if you pass a test. It was never said that the law (the LAW! USADA is not a bunch of loonies, they are a government agency appointed to fulfil a task!) could not use other methods to get the cheats. It is as silly as to say "if I steal but am not caught in the act, then I am innocent and later evidence cannot change it", which is insane. It equates justice to a sort of sport: catch me, or else you loose. That's not the rule. If you're a crook or a cheat or a murderer, you should know no peace because justice might always catch up with you, it has all the time in the world to do so and it is never too late to knock on your door and punish your sorry ass. THAT is justice.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-10-13 19:03 by otonneau.
Re: OT : Lance Armstrong
Posted by:
Lady Jayne
()
Date: October 13, 2012 19:06
Quote
Chris Fountain
How did he pass all the urine/blood tests? Did he drink a bunch of water to dilute the chemicals if these allegations are true?
The report makes it clear that a number of methods (primarily taking saline) were used to thwart testing because he and the rest of the postal team always had at least an hours notice of the 'random' testing.
Re: OT : Lance Armstrong
Posted by:
otonneau
()
Date: October 13, 2012 19:06
Quote
keefriffhard4lifeQuote
Eleanor Rigby
so do you guys still adore the great Lance Armstrong?
He is biggest cheat the world has ever seen !!!
he has been convicted of nothing and passed lots of drug tests.
Wrong: he has just been convinced of something. USADA has the power to convict someone and they have done it. What you are saying is as absurd as if, condemned in court for theft, I would say walking out of court: "I am innocent and was convicted of nothing" - oh wait, I was actually convicted just a minute ago...
Re: OT : Lance Armstrong
Posted by:
Lady Jayne
()
Date: October 13, 2012 19:09
I actually think the overwhelming evidence of his bullying, using his influence to destroy the careers of anyone who tried to blow the whistle and lying is a lot worse than the doping.
Re: OT : Lance Armstrong
Posted by:
Rolling Hansie
()
Date: October 13, 2012 19:17
Quote
otonneau
I've even read the report
You are joking, right ? You really have that much time ?
-------------------
Keep On Rolling
Re: OT : Lance Armstrong
Posted by:
Fan Since 1964
()
Date: October 13, 2012 19:27
I wonder which period in the Rolling Stones history LA played in the band?
Wouldn't it be better this thread did wind up somewhere else?
I thought this was a Rolling Stones forum!
Been Stoned since 1964 and still am!
Wouldn't it be better this thread did wind up somewhere else?
I thought this was a Rolling Stones forum!
Been Stoned since 1964 and still am!
Re: OT : Lance Armstrong
Posted by:
treaclefingers
()
Date: October 13, 2012 19:40
Quote
KoenQuote
Chris Fountain
How did he pass all the urine/blood tests? Did he drink a bunch of water to dilute the chemicals if these allegations are true?
Saline solution.
who knew that saline solution would be the solution? Is that ironic?
Re: OT : Lance Armstrong
Posted by:
treaclefingers
()
Date: October 13, 2012 19:41
Quote
Fan Since 1964
I wonder which period in the Rolling Stones history LA played in the band?
Wouldn't it be better this thread did wind up somewhere else?
I thought this was a Rolling Stones forum!
Certainly the recent LA Friday release comes to mind. Anyone else?
Re: OT : Lance Armstrong
Posted by:
Fan Since 1964
()
Date: October 13, 2012 19:48
Quote
treaclefingersQuote
Fan Since 1964
I wonder which period in the Rolling Stones history LA played in the band?
Wouldn't it be better this thread did wind up somewhere else?
I thought this was a Rolling Stones forum!
Certainly the recent LA Friday release comes to mind. Anyone else?
Lance Armstrong Friday doesn't excist in my Rolling Stones world!
Been Stoned since 1964 and still am!
Re: OT : Lance Armstrong
Posted by:
keefriffhard4life
()
Date: October 13, 2012 22:27
Quote
otonneauQuote
keefriffhard4lifeQuote
Eleanor Rigby
so do you guys still adore the great Lance Armstrong?
He is biggest cheat the world has ever seen !!!
he has been convicted of nothing and passed lots of drug tests.
Wrong: he has just been convinced of something. USADA has the power to convict someone and they have done it. What you are saying is as absurd as if, condemned in court for theft, I would say walking out of court: "I am innocent and was convicted of nothing" - oh wait, I was actually convicted just a minute ago...[/quote
o he as dragged into court and found guilty? last i checked he just said to hell with it and gave up the fight
Re: OT : Lance Armstrong
Posted by:
stonesrule
()
Date: October 13, 2012 22:36
NY TIMES online has an amazing story about the woman who was there for all the drugging. The real facts etc.
Re: OT : Lance Armstrong
Posted by:
Max'sKansasCity
()
Date: October 13, 2012 23:17
THE FACTS ARE the International Cycling Union HAS NOT taken back the trophys yet, but I know some here dont mind making up what ever story suits them at the moment.
Re: OT : Lance Armstrong
Posted by:
Max'sKansasCity
()
Date: October 13, 2012 23:18
THE FACTS ARE he never failed a test, even though being tested over and over.
Re: OT : Lance Armstrong
Posted by:
Max'sKansasCity
()
Date: October 13, 2012 23:21
THE FACTS ARE some people on this board enjoy doing nothing better, in the whole world, than to bash on something.... anything... be it Chuck, or Ronnie or set lists, or Keith's playing or new songs or ticket prices or the frackin weather or the time of year.... when in reality THE FACTS ARE the real thing these sad people should address in the face in the mirror... they should bash away and fix the face they see in their mirror....
It is no surprise that they latch on this story and bash bash bash all the live long day long... it makes them feel good... it is sick. But then again witch hunts are nothing new.... fracking human!!
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-10-13 23:25 by Max'sKansasCity.
It is no surprise that they latch on this story and bash bash bash all the live long day long... it makes them feel good... it is sick. But then again witch hunts are nothing new.... fracking human!!
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-10-13 23:25 by Max'sKansasCity.
Re: OT : Lance Armstrong
Posted by:
otonneau
()
Date: October 14, 2012 00:35
Keefriffhard: a court can condemn you "in abstentia", you know. You are judged on evidence and you have the right to defend yourself; if you choose to forfeit that right, you are no less judged nor condemned.
Kansascity:
THE FACTS ARE I loved cycling up until the Indurain years when it was simply impossible to take it seriously. Very sad; and I am happy that it is cleaned up of endemic fraud. Is that enough reasons to participate in an OT tread?
THE FACTS ARE Armstrong has managed to pass tests but other proofs have shown he doped and these proofs are just as valid and receivable as tests,
THE FACTS ARE cheaters take something away from others, their right to do things in a clean way. In the Armstrong years, it was impossible to have a great career in cycling and be honest. He and the other dopees have spoiled others of their chance. This is not a witch hunt, it is JUSTICE. JUSTICE is a GOOD thing nd I wish there was more of it around.
I guess UCI will take back the trophies. But in any case, I trust ASADA over UCI in this matter because UCI is an interested party in this case, and up to their neck in murky waters, whereas USADA is independent of the cycling world and have no reason to go after Armstrong but for the fact that it is their job to go after cheats.
And, yes, I read the report...That's what we insomniacs do. Unfortunately it reads like a novel so it did not put me to sleep!
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-10-14 00:41 by otonneau.
Kansascity:
THE FACTS ARE I loved cycling up until the Indurain years when it was simply impossible to take it seriously. Very sad; and I am happy that it is cleaned up of endemic fraud. Is that enough reasons to participate in an OT tread?
THE FACTS ARE Armstrong has managed to pass tests but other proofs have shown he doped and these proofs are just as valid and receivable as tests,
THE FACTS ARE cheaters take something away from others, their right to do things in a clean way. In the Armstrong years, it was impossible to have a great career in cycling and be honest. He and the other dopees have spoiled others of their chance. This is not a witch hunt, it is JUSTICE. JUSTICE is a GOOD thing nd I wish there was more of it around.
I guess UCI will take back the trophies. But in any case, I trust ASADA over UCI in this matter because UCI is an interested party in this case, and up to their neck in murky waters, whereas USADA is independent of the cycling world and have no reason to go after Armstrong but for the fact that it is their job to go after cheats.
And, yes, I read the report...That's what we insomniacs do. Unfortunately it reads like a novel so it did not put me to sleep!
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-10-14 00:41 by otonneau.
Re: OT : Lance Armstrong
Posted by:
Max'sKansasCity
()
Date: October 14, 2012 00:40
I couldnt care less if you were a Pro cyclist...
There is one authourity on this and it is NOT YOU.... or THE US Anti-Doping Agency
AGAIN!!
Has the International Cycling Union taken back the trophys yet? No, it has not. [article.wn.com]
The Australian 2012-08-26: THE US Anti-Doping Agency has no jurisdiction or legal right to strip Lance Armstrong of his seven Tour de France titles, according to one of Australia's most senior officials. Sydney's Phill Bates, a member of the international cycling union's arbitration tribunal, yesterday described USADA's actions against Armstrong as unenforceable and described the organisation's chief executive Travis Tygart as an "egomaniac publicity hunter".[article.wn.com]
There is one authourity on this and it is NOT YOU.... or THE US Anti-Doping Agency
AGAIN!!
Has the International Cycling Union taken back the trophys yet? No, it has not. [article.wn.com]
The Australian 2012-08-26: THE US Anti-Doping Agency has no jurisdiction or legal right to strip Lance Armstrong of his seven Tour de France titles, according to one of Australia's most senior officials. Sydney's Phill Bates, a member of the international cycling union's arbitration tribunal, yesterday described USADA's actions against Armstrong as unenforceable and described the organisation's chief executive Travis Tygart as an "egomaniac publicity hunter".[article.wn.com]
Re: OT : Lance Armstrong
Posted by:
Max'sKansasCity
()
Date: October 14, 2012 00:43
I guarantee that if THE US Anti-Doping Agency was talking about a European rider about this that the tone/opinion on this board would be opposite of the current "BURN THE WITCH ... BURN THE WITCH!!"
Re: OT : Lance Armstrong
Posted by:
otonneau
()
Date: October 14, 2012 00:44
The UCI is up to their head in murky waters since the Indurain years at least. Remember it is a private body that makes its own rules, and it is not in their interest for their policies and winners to be thus exposed. Many other bodies have tried to fight its influence for decades and failed. Everybody inside cycling know that Verbruggen is a crook. Instead of listening to insults, READ THE REPORT and tell me afterward what you believe. DARE TO DOUBT instead of blindly defending the indefensible.
Re: OT : Lance Armstrong
Posted by:
otonneau
()
Date: October 14, 2012 00:53
MaxKansasCity, I am French so hear it from me: Laurent Jalabert, never caught at anti-doping tests, was a fraud and a cheat. Virenque, obviously got caught. Indurain was a fraud and a cheat. Bugno, Ulrich, Zulle, were all frauds and cheats.
I have nothing personally against Armstrong and I am happy that the Tour said they would nominate no winners in his stead - the 2nd and 3rd were doped as well anyway, EVERY YEAR.
If you read Albert Londres' book on the Tour, written in the 40s, you'll read that the riders were already doping, or trying to; caffeine and cocaine, and bizarre stuff like frog saliva (true!). So doping was always there and almost all cyclists doped. Anquetil said it: "I dope because everybody dopes". The difference is that old-school doping had minimal effects on performance, so that you could somewhat overlook the general doping culture and still thing that the best man wins. From EPO onwards, things changed because EPO is a completely different kind of dope. You don't dope on the day but year round. You don't give a tiny boost to your natural capacities but radically alter them. Suddenly ENTIRE TEAMS were running at unbelievable speeds and hardly breaking a sweat. The whole thing became farcical, and also ugly. It became as organized as a drug traffic, and just as violent. A rider had no choice; team principals who force him to dope and ruin his life.
In cycling, there is a doping culture somewhat like the drug culture in, say, jazz circles. That's a fact and everybody knows it. It was tolerated. But now things have gone too far, gotten too violent and dangerous. It must be stopped. Thus it is excellent news for cycling that the most successful and powerful cyclist was caught. It is an excellent signal: nobody is above the law; if Armstrong has fallen, nobody is safe and all must clean up their act. That's why I am delighted that he got caught. I couldn't care less whether it was Jalabert or Zulle or Ulrich... instead of him.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-10-14 00:54 by otonneau.
I have nothing personally against Armstrong and I am happy that the Tour said they would nominate no winners in his stead - the 2nd and 3rd were doped as well anyway, EVERY YEAR.
If you read Albert Londres' book on the Tour, written in the 40s, you'll read that the riders were already doping, or trying to; caffeine and cocaine, and bizarre stuff like frog saliva (true!). So doping was always there and almost all cyclists doped. Anquetil said it: "I dope because everybody dopes". The difference is that old-school doping had minimal effects on performance, so that you could somewhat overlook the general doping culture and still thing that the best man wins. From EPO onwards, things changed because EPO is a completely different kind of dope. You don't dope on the day but year round. You don't give a tiny boost to your natural capacities but radically alter them. Suddenly ENTIRE TEAMS were running at unbelievable speeds and hardly breaking a sweat. The whole thing became farcical, and also ugly. It became as organized as a drug traffic, and just as violent. A rider had no choice; team principals who force him to dope and ruin his life.
In cycling, there is a doping culture somewhat like the drug culture in, say, jazz circles. That's a fact and everybody knows it. It was tolerated. But now things have gone too far, gotten too violent and dangerous. It must be stopped. Thus it is excellent news for cycling that the most successful and powerful cyclist was caught. It is an excellent signal: nobody is above the law; if Armstrong has fallen, nobody is safe and all must clean up their act. That's why I am delighted that he got caught. I couldn't care less whether it was Jalabert or Zulle or Ulrich... instead of him.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-10-14 00:54 by otonneau.
Re: OT : Lance Armstrong
Posted by:
Max'sKansasCity
()
Date: October 14, 2012 00:54
Some people, like the people of Winston Salem, and the people running the Spanish Inquisition will convict hearsay evidence.... I ON THE OTHER HAND would like some hard evidence... NOT HEARSAY EVIDENCE!!
And every time we look back on the Witch trials of Winston or the Spanish Inquisition we all agree... "wow, we shouldnt do that type of thing"... BUT HERE YOU ARE TODAY DOING THE SAME SHIT!!
When the day comes that there is hard evidence presened by a legit authority to convict this man.... then I will stop defending him... but until that day I will speak up for him. AND EVERY OTHER PEROSN ON THIS PLANET WHO IS BEING PERSECUTED BASED ON OPINION.... But I would rather not start too many converstaions about all of the people being fkd over in this world becasue it is somewhat depressing and not near as much fun as other topics.
And if/when the day comes that they present evidence proving he is guilty I wont see it, I wont know if it is legit... but if the real people in charge say it is good, then I will trust them.... BUT AS OF TODAY, FOR SOME INSANE REASON... NO ONE HAS PRESENTED THE EVIDENCE, ONLY HEARSAY.... BUT THEY SURE TALK A LOT OF SHIT!
And every time we look back on the Witch trials of Winston or the Spanish Inquisition we all agree... "wow, we shouldnt do that type of thing"... BUT HERE YOU ARE TODAY DOING THE SAME SHIT!!
When the day comes that there is hard evidence presened by a legit authority to convict this man.... then I will stop defending him... but until that day I will speak up for him. AND EVERY OTHER PEROSN ON THIS PLANET WHO IS BEING PERSECUTED BASED ON OPINION.... But I would rather not start too many converstaions about all of the people being fkd over in this world becasue it is somewhat depressing and not near as much fun as other topics.
And if/when the day comes that they present evidence proving he is guilty I wont see it, I wont know if it is legit... but if the real people in charge say it is good, then I will trust them.... BUT AS OF TODAY, FOR SOME INSANE REASON... NO ONE HAS PRESENTED THE EVIDENCE, ONLY HEARSAY.... BUT THEY SURE TALK A LOT OF SHIT!
Re: OT : Lance Armstrong
Posted by:
Max'sKansasCity
()
Date: October 14, 2012 00:57
Quote
otonneau
MaxKansasCity, I am French so hear it from me: Laurent Jalabert, never caught at anti-doping tests, was a fraud and a cheat. Virenque, obviously got caught. Indurain was a fraud and a cheat. Bugno, Ulrich, Zulle, were all frauds and cheats.
I have nothing personally against Armstrong and I am happy that the Tour said they would nominate no winners in his stead - the 2nd and 3rd were doped as well anyway, EVERY YEAR.
If you read Albert Londres' book on the Tour, written in the 40s, you'll read that the riders were already doping, or trying to; caffeine and cocaine, and bizarre stuff like frog saliva (true!). So doping was always there and almost all cyclists doped. Anquetil said it: "I dope because everybody dopes". The difference is that old-school doping had minimal effects on performance, so that you could somewhat overlook the general doping culture and still thing that the best man wins. From EPO onwards, things changed because EPO is a completely different kind of dope. You don't dope on the day but year round. You don't give a tiny boost to your natural capacities but radically alter them. Suddenly ENTIRE TEAMS were running at unbelievable speeds and hardly breaking a sweat. The whole thing became farcical, and also ugly. It became as organized as a drug traffic, and just as violent. A rider had no choice; team principals who force him to dope and ruin his life.
In cycling, there is a doping culture somewhat like the drug culture in, say, jazz circles. That's a fact and everybody knows it. It was tolerated. But now things have gone too far, gotten too violent and dangerous. It must be stopped. Thus it is excellent news for cycling that the most successful and powerful cyclist was caught. It is an excellent signal: nobody is above the law; if Armstrong has fallen, nobody is safe and all must clean up their act. That's why I am delighted that he got caught. I couldn't care less whether it was Jalabert or Zulle or Ulrich... instead of him.
They tested him... over and over and over... he passed them all.
Re: OT : Lance Armstrong
Posted by:
otonneau
()
Date: October 14, 2012 01:00
The evidence in the report is not only testimonial. It contains physiological data which can only be explained by drug taking. Remember science improves and scientists can deduce more now from these data than they could before. Read the report and you will see that it does NOT contain only testimonial evidence. Remember also that testimonial evidence is not the same thing as hearsay. In a witch hunt, it is enough for my neighbour to say I am a communist for the government to lock me away. In a fair inquiry like that of USADA, testimonies are carefully cross-examined, analysed, etc, in order to assert their weight. The report shows very clearly the care they took in their procedure. Rememeber Armstrong went to court arguing that evidence was too slim for a judgement to take place and his claim was rejected by a judge. How many people are you ready to believe are either corrupt, biased, stupid or evil? You are faced with a choice: either a very very wide number of people are corrupt biased stupid or evil and Armstrong is innocent, or a lot of professional scientists and jurists are doing a normal good job and he is guilty. What are the odds?
Re: OT : Lance Armstrong
Posted by:
Braincapers
()
Date: October 14, 2012 01:01
Quote
Max'sKansasCity
I guarantee that if THE US Anti-Doping Agency was talking about a European rider about this that the tone/opinion on this board would be opposite of the current "BURN THE WITCH ... BURN THE WITCH!!"
And would Americans be so agitated if Armstrong was European.
I have no special knowledge, or even a strong opinion, on the guilt or innocence of Armstrong but you don't need a smoking gun, or even a body, to get a murder conviction so proving drug taking probably doesn't need a positive urine sample.
Also the quote from the Cycling Union is almost 2 months old. The current position is a little different.
UCI chief defiant despite Armstrong scandal
By Carol Huang (AFP) – 5 hours ago
BEIJING — World cycling chief Pat McQuaid insisted the sport had moved on from its murky past Saturday as the body comes under pressure to respond to doping evidence against Tour de France icon Lance Armstrong.
McQuaid admitted cycling had suffered "big damage" from the affair but he said better tests meant riders were now much cleaner than previous days, which are in focus since claims targeting Armstrong were released this week.
"The sport has moved on," the International Cycling Union (UCI) president told AFP at the Tour of Beijing. "The peloton today is completely different."
"There is big damage to the image of the sport, but the sport is going very well," he added.
Armstrong, who denies taking banned substances, is accused by the US Anti-Doping Agency (USADA) of being at the heart of "the most sophisticated, professionalised and successful doping programme" ever seen in sport.
The UCI is yet to respond to USADA's 1,000-page document, which raises questions about how Armstrong apparently managed to evade detection, and contains a claim that he paid a bribe to hush up a positive test.
The body is also yet to endorse or reject USADA's move to ban Armstrong from cycling for life and strip him of his Tour titles, a sanction that currently only has force in the United States.
"The UCI has received the dossier two days ago, 1,000 pages, and so our lawyers are studying that at the moment and we have 21 days to come up with a response," McQuaid said earlier this week.
He added: "It would be wrong of me to second guess or pre-empt what our lawyers might decide, so I'd wait until then. The UCI will wait until that work has been done and then the UCI will make a statement."
Re: OT : Lance Armstrong
Posted by:
otonneau
()
Date: October 14, 2012 01:01
They tested him... and re-tested him... and applied different valid methods... and he got caught. Now believe what you wish! No point in prolonging this.
Re: OT : Lance Armstrong
Posted by:
Koen
()
Date: October 14, 2012 01:07
Quote
Max'sKansasCity
They tested him... over and over and over... he passed them all.
Because he was cheating.
This Thread has been closed
Online Users
angee , EggersBand , esqcjh , Fuman2 , ghs73 , guytout59 , kovach , MonkeyMan2000 , stonenut356 , Topi , wiredallnight , wolundamo
Guests:
1279
Record Number of Users:
206
on June 1, 2022 23:50
Record Number of Guests:
9627
on January 2, 2024 23:10