Lance Armstrong II: Electric Boogaloo!

[Jetworks]

Originally Posted by Gangrene

You do look like a fit Mo'Fo', Stokes.

Meh, short guys always have really good definition. It's a happy trade-off.


























Like WCO said in the other thread, all the b!tches that complained about Armstrong were cheating as well, so it seems like a bunch of sour grapes. He was the best out of all of them. Phuck the USADA.

[thebigragu]

Originally Posted by Gangrene

You do look like a fit Mo'Fo', Stokes.

You in the bicycle shorts and Ragu in his wife-beater in the kitchen with the Poodle could do an awesome work-out / tomato sauce cook-off video ...

If that seat was any lower on that bike he'd be riding a big wheel.

[Big L]

I heard the evidence was just about a dozen people saying they saw him do it. No hard evidence. That's it, someone's word. Not sure how that would stand up in court.

If you are truly innocent, fight it till your dying day.

And why'd it take so long to pinch Armstrong? This was like 10 years ago. Statute of limitations? They busted that Landis guy like a day after.

[PlumberKhan]

[Gangrene]

Originally Posted by Big L

I heard the evidence was just about a dozen people saying they saw him do it. No hard evidence. That's it, someone's word. Not sure how that would stand up in court.

If you are truly innocent, fight it till your dying day.

And why'd it take so long to pinch Armstrong? This was like 10 years ago. Statute of limitations? They busted that Landis guy like a day after.

They reason it took so long was other than Landis no one else was willing to testify until relatively recently. When other cyclists faced prosecution and a decided to tell what they know.

Any prosecutor with 10-plus witnesses, all more or less saying the same thing, would feel really comfortable about the odds of winning.

Our law enforcement friends will tell you there are thousands of people in the US successfully prosecuted based on circumstantial evidence.

– It’s true Lance never failed a doping test. He did test positive at the 1999 Tour for a corticosteroid and then produced a back-dated doctor’s prescription. Those tests are only a starting point.

For example Marion Jones passed 160 tests — and turned out to be a chronic doper.

Travis Tygart, the chief executive of USADA: "He knows all the evidence as well and he knows the truth, and so the smarter move on his part is to attempt to hide behind baseless accusations of process....We never would have brought a case if we were not extremely confident in the level of evidence."

[Jman21]

Originally Posted by JStokes

You muther...here's a real one from the Wyckoff Tri.


_

Have you had a pro bike fit? Seat looks low.

[WestCoastOffensive]

Originally Posted by Jman21

Have you had a pro bike fit? Seat looks low.

He might be on the downstroke...



ohno

[JStokes]

Originally Posted by Jman21

Have you had a pro bike fit? Seat looks low.

When I'm in the riding position it is perfect. It was the last one that existed in the US, bought it down at a pro bike shop in Philly. Years ago.

Looking for my Pinarello now

_

[Soberphobia]

Originally Posted by Gangrene

They reason it took so long was other than Landis no one else was willing to testify until relatively recently. When other cyclists faced prosecution and a decided to tell what they know.

Any prosecutor with 10-plus witnesses, all more or less saying the same thing, would feel really comfortable about the odds of winning.

Our law enforcement friends will tell you there are thousands of people in the US successfully prosecuted based on circumstantial evidence.

– It’s true Lance never failed a doping test. He did test positive at the 1999 Tour for a corticosteroid and then produced a back-dated doctor’s prescription. Those tests are only a starting point.

For example Marion Jones passed 160 tests — and turned out to be a chronic doper.

Travis Tygart, the chief executive of USADA: "He knows all the evidence as well and he knows the truth, and so the smarter move on his part is to attempt to hide behind baseless accusations of process....We never would have brought a case if we were not extremely confident in the level of evidence."

That's pretty much it in a nutshell.

[Big L]

Originally Posted by Gangrene

They reason it took so long was other than Landis no one else was willing to testify until relatively recently. When other cyclists faced prosecution and a decided to tell what they know.

Any prosecutor with 10-plus witnesses, all more or less saying the same thing, would feel really comfortable about the odds of winning.

Our law enforcement friends will tell you there are thousands of people in the US successfully prosecuted based on circumstantial evidence.

– It’s true Lance never failed a doping test. He did test positive at the 1999 Tour for a corticosteroid and then produced a back-dated doctor’s prescription. Those tests are only a starting point.

For example Marion Jones passed 160 tests — and turned out to be a chronic doper.

Travis Tygart, the chief executive of USADA: "He knows all the evidence as well and he knows the truth, and so the smarter move on his part is to attempt to hide behind baseless accusations of process....We never would have brought a case if we were not extremely confident in the level of evidence."

No one was willing to testify until they were busted themselves? Hmmm... That sounds really suspect. Face prosecution, or give us dirt on Armtsrong. 'In that case, he's dirty as they come'.

Listen, sounds like everyone in the sport was doing it, but Armstrong had a foolproof way to beat the system, and now it's a vendetta, based on circumstantial evidence, and has been going on for a decade. No offense, but really does sound like a witch hunt to me.

[The Boston Patriot]

Originally Posted by Big L

No one was willing to testify until they were busted themselves? Hmmm... That sounds really suspect. Face prosecution, or give us dirt on Armtsrong. 'In that case, he's dirty as they come'.

Listen, sounds like everyone in the sport was doing it, but Armstrong had a foolproof way to beat the system, and now it's a vendetta, based on circumstantial evidence, and has been going on for a decade. No offense, but really does sound like a witch hunt to me.

This guy gets it!

[Soberphobia]

Interview by sports-drug expert on the matter (from a few years ago).

[BushyTheBeaver]

Originally Posted by Big L

No one was willing to testify until they were busted themselves? Hmmm... That sounds really suspect. Face prosecution, or give us dirt on Armtsrong. 'In that case, he's dirty as they come'.

Listen, sounds like everyone in the sport was doing it, but Armstrong had a foolproof way to beat the system, and now it's a vendetta, based on circumstantial evidence, and has been going on for a decade. No offense, but really does sound like a witch hunt to me.

A) Few drug dealers are successfully prosecuted based on the testimony of village priests. It usually takes the testimony of a lawbreaker to catch a lawbreaker. And yes, not surprisingly, those testimonies do not come willingly. They offer them when they have no other choice.

B) Everyone was doing it is not a defense. Ever. Everyone speeds while driving at one time or another. That's not a valid reason to eliminate speed limits or penalties for speeding.

C) RE vendetta...if 1) as you suggest doping was widespread, and 2) there's a belief the biggest name in the sport is doing it, who the hell else would you prosecute first? The #4 guy?

I can understand not wanting to believe Armstrong was guilty. I have a harder time understanding "But even if he was guilty this is a witchhunt." Because if he was breaking the rules why shouldn't he be called on it? Where they may get into difficulty is if they take Armstrong's titles away, whom do they give them to? Doper #2?

[JetsfanfromtheBURGH]

The F'er has never tested positive in countless tests. its a witch hunt plain and simple. i understand the French might be behind this, but they are all phags anyway..... so who F'ing cares *****es!!!!!!!!

[BushyTheBeaver]

Originally Posted by JetsfanfromtheBURGH

The F'er has never tested positive in countless tests. its a witch hunt plain and simple. i understand the French might be behind this, but they are all phags anyway..... so who F'ing cares *****es!!!!!!!!

Well there's an intelligent response. Case solved...the French a phags. As opposed to case solved: someone's an idiot.

[Soberphobia]

Originally Posted by JetsfanfromtheBURGH

The F'er has never tested positive in countless tests. its a witch hunt plain and simple. i understand the French might be behind this, but they are all phags anyway..... so who F'ing cares *****es!!!!!!!!

From the interview above:

Lance Armstrong's '99 samples test positive

AS: So out of the 87 usable samples that they gathered, they got 13 positives and 6 of them belonged to Lance Armstrong.

MA: Depending on which criteria you applied. Yes, six of them failed the definitive criteria. There were another two samples in fact where the EPO was visually there in the gel. You could see it was there, but for one reason or another, the percentage isoforms weren't calculated, or had to be re-analyzed, or it was a little bit too faint to get a definitive result. Yes, there were six samples with EPO in it, and there were another two samples where it was pretty plain to a trained observer that there was synthetic EPO in those as well.

The possibility of tampering

AS: I guess I should set the background a little bit more now. This study was done for research purposes so the urine was marked with code numbers and there was no way for the testers to know who the samples belong to. It was only through some subterfuge by some French reporters that it was revealed that the six positives belonged to Armstrong.

AS: So based on that, you can definitively say that Lance Armstrong used EPO in the '99 Tour. No doubt in your mind.

MA: There is no doubt in my mind these samples contain synthetic EPO, they belong to Lance Armstrong, and there's no conceivable way that I can see that a lab could've spiked them in a way that the data has presented itself. So there is no doubt in my mind he took EPO during the '99 Tour.

[Gangrene]

Originally Posted by Soberphobia

From the interview above:

Lance Armstrong's '99 samples test positive

AS: So out of the 87 usable samples that they gathered, they got 13 positives and 6 of them belonged to Lance Armstrong.

MA: Depending on which criteria you applied. Yes, six of them failed the definitive criteria. There were another two samples in fact where the EPO was visually there in the gel. You could see it was there, but for one reason or another, the percentage isoforms weren't calculated, or had to be re-analyzed, or it was a little bit too faint to get a definitive result. Yes, there were six samples with EPO in it, and there were another two samples where it was pretty plain to a trained observer that there was synthetic EPO in those as well.

The possibility of tampering

AS: I guess I should set the background a little bit more now. This study was done for research purposes so the urine was marked with code numbers and there was no way for the testers to know who the samples belong to. It was only through some subterfuge by some French reporters that it was revealed that the six positives belonged to Armstrong.

AS: So based on that, you can definitively say that Lance Armstrong used EPO in the '99 Tour. No doubt in your mind.

MA: There is no doubt in my mind these samples contain synthetic EPO, they belong to Lance Armstrong, and there's no conceivable way that I can see that a lab could've spiked them in a way that the data has presented itself. So there is no doubt in my mind he took EPO during the '99 Tour.

Good read, thank you.

[RaoulDuke]

GAME OVER

UCI has officially stripped him of his 7 Tour de France titles

[frostlich]

Meh.....sports has become so nearly universally corrupt in the past couple of decades with cheating and doping that its not even big news anymore.

Was really hoping Armstrong was one of the good guys. Foolish in retrospect.

Lifetime bannings should be in order across the board. The message to all of these sports' cheaters is not being received or taken seriously.

[Jetworks]

Originally Posted by RaoulDuke

GAME OVER

UCI has officially stripped him of his 7 Tour de France titles

So I assume the titles are voided unless they intend to look as hard into the doping of the runners-up?