|
Armstrong stops fighting doping charges - USADA wants him banned and stripped for titles
|
| fcancellara |
Posted on 25-08-2012 15:35
|
Grand Tour Specialist
Posts: 4813
Joined: 18-08-2011
PCM$: 200.00
|
Just asking, why is Armstrong banned for life, and not just for 2 years, as is usual for a doping suspension?
Hope any expert (issoisso, Aquarius) can answer 
|
| |
|
|
| lluuiiggii |
Posted on 25-08-2012 16:39
|
Grand Tour Champion
Posts: 8425
Joined: 30-07-2010
PCM$: 200.00
|
To those creating rankings of clear riders, and doped riders, etc etc, here is to save your time
|
| |
|
|
| jack888 |
Posted on 25-08-2012 17:49
|
Protected Rider
Posts: 1225
Joined: 09-06-2009
PCM$: 200.00
|
I've read that Lance tested positive to EPO in the 1999 TDF, if this is true. Why wasn't he suspended? Loopholes? |
| |
|
|
| mb2612 |
Posted on 25-08-2012 17:57
|
Team Leader
Posts: 5535
Joined: 18-05-2008
PCM$: 200.00
|
jack888 wrote:
I've read that Lance tested positive to EPO in the 1999 TDF, if this is true. Why wasn't he suspended? Loopholes?
He got a backdated TUE
 [url=www.pcmdaily.com/forum/viewthread.php?thread_id=33182] Team Santander Media Thread[/url]
Please assume I am joking unless otherwise stated |
| |
|
|
| lluuiiggii |
Posted on 25-08-2012 18:04
|
Grand Tour Champion
Posts: 8425
Joined: 30-07-2010
PCM$: 200.00
|
jack888 wrote:
I've read that Lance tested positive to EPO in the 1999 TDF, if this is true. Why wasn't he suspended? Loopholes?
I'm not an 'expert' like isso or others here, but afaik those weren't official tests, they were retrospective tests in 2005 over frozen samples from 99, even because in 99 there were no tests for EPO, which were only introduced in the 2000 Sidney Olympics.
mb2612 wrote:
jack888 wrote:
I've read that Lance tested positive to EPO in the 1999 TDF, if this is true. Why wasn't he suspended? Loopholes?
He got a backdated TUE
The TUE was for a corticosteroids positive, which differently than the EPO 'occurred' at the time (not years later). He claimed he used it for saddle sores I think.
Well from big isso's post, linked a couple of times in this thread:
There's the re-testing of 1999 Tour samples where Lance tested positive 6 different times for EPO, in ways in which, with the doses of EPO being as they are in each individual test, the samples being contaminated is impossible (high dosage on the morning of each important stage, lower doses in between, just as you'd expect from a normal doping regimen).
I'd like to point out that the usual blind lance fan's argument against this is the stupidest ever: "the samples were kept for 6 years before being re-tested. they were no longer proper".
First of all, clinical trials were started in 1972 by preserving samples to see for how many years they would still be reliably testable. We're in 2009 and still counting, and that's far longer than 6 years.
Second of all, even if the time for a sample to be reliable were extremely short, say for instance only 2 weeks, exogenous EPO doesn't "magically" appear in urine out of thin air.
There's Lance consistently denying that he had any TUEs to declare several times during the first two weeks of the Tour, only for his teammate Kevin Livingston to run into the room in a hurry screaming "****! they're testing us for corticosteroids!" two weeks later, at which point Armstrong coincidentally "remembered" that he had a TUE to declare after all, and...what a coincidence...a TUE for corticosteroids precisely. One that was later established was in fact a backdated prescription. Needless to say Lance tested positive. But he got away on account of having a prescription. Pierre Ballester has the audio records of an interview in that Tour, before Lance tested positive where Lance says, and I quote: "No. No TUEs whatsoever"
|
| |
|
|
| pcm2009fan |
Posted on 25-08-2012 18:35
|
Protected Rider
Posts: 1016
Joined: 30-07-2010
PCM$: 200.00
|
fcancellara wrote:
Just asking, why is Armstrong banned for life, and not just for 2 years, as is usual for a doping suspension?
Well I'd assume that's because he's not just being charged for doping himself, but also as the mastermind behind a widespread team-doping scandal. Not that the ban really matters does it? |
| |
|
|
| Ad Bot |
Posted on 18-12-2025 13:02
|
Bot Agent
Posts: Countless
Joined: 23.11.09
|
|
| IP: None |
|
|
| Ian Butler |
Posted on 25-08-2012 18:56
|
Tour de France Champion
Posts: 21379
Joined: 01-05-2012
PCM$: 400.00
|
I heard he made a contribute to UCI for 200.000 dollars once, has this got anything to do with it? Supposedly it was for them to use in the fight against doping, but I heard it was pay-off. Not sure, though, just telling you what I read in today's papers. |
| |
|
|
| jsh312mufc |
Posted on 25-08-2012 19:03
|
Domestique
Posts: 705
Joined: 05-02-2012
PCM$: 300.00
|
pcm2009fan wrote:
fcancellara wrote:
Just asking, why is Armstrong banned for life, and not just for 2 years, as is usual for a doping suspension?
Well I'd assume that's because he's not just being charged for doping himself, but also as the mastermind behind a widespread team-doping scandal. Not that the ban really matters does it?
you get a longer doping sentence if it is a repeated offence. Ricardo Ricco got around a 40 year ban from cycling last year, so as armstrong doped for over a decade, the life ban is justified
Edited by jsh312mufc on 25-08-2012 19:04
|
| |
|
|
| Aquarius |
Posted on 25-08-2012 19:23
|
Grand Tour Specialist
Posts: 4851
Joined: 29-11-2006
PCM$: 200.00
|
Ian Butler wrote:
I heard he made a contribute to UCI for 200.000 dollars once, has this got anything to do with it? Supposedly it was for them to use in the fight against doping, but I heard it was pay-off. Not sure, though, just telling you what I read in today's papers.
It was supposedly a pay off for his Tour de Suisse EPO positive test in 2001.
UCI hid it, but maybe they were just being generous, and Armstrong, without any connection to that under rug swept positive test decided to make them a huge gift, by pure generosity.
I reckon pcm2009fan has it right about the life time ban instead of two years. He's not being sentenced for one positive test, but for something much bigger. |
| |
|
|
| issoisso |
Posted on 25-08-2012 19:24
|
Tour de France Champion
Posts: 19134
Joined: 08-02-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
fcancellara wrote:
Just asking, why is Armstrong banned for life, and not just for 2 years, as is usual for a doping suspension?
Hope any expert (issoisso, Aquarius) can answer
2 years is for doping. He was convicted not just of doping, but also of drug trafficking, distribution and administering. Penalty ranges from a 4 year ban for one time things, to a lifetime ban for a repeated offence, which was the case since he repeated it for 14 years
Ian Butler wrote:
I heard he made a contribute to UCI for 200.000 dollars once, has this got anything to do with it? Supposedly it was for them to use in the fight against doping, but I heard it was pay-off. Not sure, though, just telling you what I read in today's papers.
According to his teammates who testified, it was a bribe so the UCI would bury the fact that he tested positive at the 2001 Tour de Suisse
jack888 wrote:
I've read that Lance tested positive to EPO in the 1999 TDF, if this is true. Why wasn't he suspended? Loopholes?
The UCI decided not to pursue it because.........
uhm......because.......
...............
The preceding post is ISSO 9001 certified
"I love him, I think he's great. He's transformed the sport in so many ways. Every person in cycling has benefitted from Lance Armstrong, perhaps not financially but in some sense" - Bradley Wiggins on Lance Armstrong
|
| |
|
|
| zachbastian |
Posted on 25-08-2012 19:27
|
Free Agent
Posts: 125
Joined: 26-07-2010
PCM$: 200.00
|
Sure, he was doped, but who wasn´t? |
| |
|
|
| Aquarius |
Posted on 25-08-2012 19:29
|
Grand Tour Specialist
Posts: 4851
Joined: 29-11-2006
PCM$: 200.00
|
zachbastian wrote:
Sure, he was doped, but who wasn´t?
Moncoutié seems above suspicion, yet he came 12th in the TDF 2002, being probably caught in any echelon that might have happened that year. |
| |
|
|
| issoisso |
Posted on 25-08-2012 19:32
|
Tour de France Champion
Posts: 19134
Joined: 08-02-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
A comment by a french friend of mine on all this:
All those stories remind me of the Virenque/Jalabert/Armstrong era.
My father being head of the sports pages of a big newspaper in France, I was there with the journalists when they were talking about those guys.
Some that I remember :
"When Jalabert removes his shirt it's like seeing the moon.."
And the joke about Jalabert : "You know why Jalabert always has new shoes ? Well, his feet are expanding every year"
The preceding post is ISSO 9001 certified
"I love him, I think he's great. He's transformed the sport in so many ways. Every person in cycling has benefitted from Lance Armstrong, perhaps not financially but in some sense" - Bradley Wiggins on Lance Armstrong
|
| |
|
|
| Aquarius |
Posted on 25-08-2012 20:28
|
Grand Tour Specialist
Posts: 4851
Joined: 29-11-2006
PCM$: 200.00
|
Yeah, I knew about the shoes. Thought I had mentioned it a couple of times before, but I may be wrong.
Funny to have him interviewed about Armstrong, he feels a little embarrassed when it comes to condemning him, so he beats around the bush "too late", etc.
No matter how talented he was/is, Jalabert has always been a cycling chemical object. |
| |
|
|
| Movistar |
Posted on 25-08-2012 21:08
|
Domestique
Posts: 424
Joined: 05-06-2012
PCM$: 200.00
|
issoisso wrote:
fcancellara wrote:
Just asking, why is Armstrong banned for life, and not just for 2 years, as is usual for a doping suspension?
Hope any expert (issoisso, Aquarius) can answer
2 years is for doping. He was convicted not just of doping, but also of drug trafficking, distribution and administering. Penalty ranges from a 4 year ban for one time things, to a lifetime ban for a repeated offence, which was the case since he repeated it for 14 years
Ian Butler wrote:
I heard he made a contribute to UCI for 200.000 dollars once, has this got anything to do with it? Supposedly it was for them to use in the fight against doping, but I heard it was pay-off. Not sure, though, just telling you what I read in today's papers.
According to his teammates who testified, it was a bribe so the UCI would bury the fact that he tested positive at the 2001 Tour de Suisse
jack888 wrote:
I've read that Lance tested positive to EPO in the 1999 TDF, if this is true. Why wasn't he suspended? Loopholes?
The UCI decided not to pursue it because.........
uhm......because.......
...............
He has not been convicted of anything. For someone who supposedly knows it all about this topic you really are just a biased bitter loser. |
| |
|
|
| Aquarius |
Posted on 25-08-2012 21:10
|
Grand Tour Specialist
Posts: 4851
Joined: 29-11-2006
PCM$: 200.00
|
Well, all those doping stories about Armstrong have always been conspiracies of jealous untalented losers anyway. What else should you expect from people ?  |
| |
|
|
| Crommy |
Posted on 25-08-2012 21:11
|
Grand Tour Champion
Posts: 8755
Joined: 29-11-2006
PCM$: 200.00
|
Movistar wrote:
issoisso wrote:
fcancellara wrote:
Just asking, why is Armstrong banned for life, and not just for 2 years, as is usual for a doping suspension?
Hope any expert (issoisso, Aquarius) can answer
2 years is for doping. He was convicted not just of doping, but also of drug trafficking, distribution and administering. Penalty ranges from a 4 year ban for one time things, to a lifetime ban for a repeated offence, which was the case since he repeated it for 14 years
Ian Butler wrote:
I heard he made a contribute to UCI for 200.000 dollars once, has this got anything to do with it? Supposedly it was for them to use in the fight against doping, but I heard it was pay-off. Not sure, though, just telling you what I read in today's papers.
According to his teammates who testified, it was a bribe so the UCI would bury the fact that he tested positive at the 2001 Tour de Suisse
jack888 wrote:
I've read that Lance tested positive to EPO in the 1999 TDF, if this is true. Why wasn't he suspended? Loopholes?
The UCI decided not to pursue it because.........
uhm......because.......
...............
He has not been convicted of anything. For someone who supposedly knows it all about this topic you really are just a biased bitter loser.
What on Earth do you think has just happened then?
 |
| |
|
|
| Crommy |
Posted on 25-08-2012 21:13
|
Grand Tour Champion
Posts: 8755
Joined: 29-11-2006
PCM$: 200.00
|
https://www.cyclin...g-controls
Most important part of this for me is:
"Work together with Antoine Vayer [LeMond columnist], the performance specialist, helped show the implausibility of the power generated in watts on the climbs. Moreover, it is interesting to note that the UCI has banned the publication of such real-time statistics in 2012. And we can understand why when you see that the power production by [Bradley] Wiggins and [Chris] Froome (first and second of the Tour) is comparable to the turbulent times of the late 1990s and early 2000s."
Is this true?
|
| |
|
|
| Aquarius |
Posted on 25-08-2012 21:15
|
Grand Tour Specialist
Posts: 4851
Joined: 29-11-2006
PCM$: 200.00
|
Crommy wrote:
Movistar wrote:
He has not been convicted of anything. For someone who supposedly knows it all about this topic you really are just a biased bitter loser.
What on Earth do you think has just happened then?
Nothing he's seen.
 |
| |
|
|
| Alesle |
Posted on 25-08-2012 21:32
|
Stagiare
Posts: 188
Joined: 30-11-2006
PCM$: 200.00
|
rusholme_moz wrote:
CLURPR wrote:
Does he get stripped of his results from his comeback too? Then that means Wiggo came 3rd in 2009!! 
Hi Guys, great discussion.
I just wanted something clearing up. In [url="https://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2012/aug/24/lance-armstrong-stripped-tour-de-france"]this article[/url] it quotes USADA as saying "Additionally, scientific data showed Mr Armstrong's use of blood manipulation including EPO or blood transfusions during Mr Armstrong's comeback to cycling in the 2009 Tour de France."
I'm aware of all the other evidence, but this was news to me...does anyone have any details about these 2009 tests?
From my memory, it's just that his blood passport data suggested that he was using blood tranfusions or EPO (his haematocrit level stayed constant througout the tour. Another noteable rider with a similar blood passport for that tour was Wiggins. I don't think any other of the top GC riders from that tour published their blood passport data). |
| |
|
