All i can say to that is, if it is true - if it really was Armstrongs blood they tested - that i'm very disappointed in Amstrong.
Given the number of positive samples that tested positive, even if there had been some issues with at least one of the samples (which I find to be unlikely, but I'll grant you that), then Armstrong would surely be a prime candidate for re-testing anyway, right? So it seems likely that it would be his samples which were re-tested. This can be taken further if we take his own statement that he is the "most tested athlete in the world" (which he isn't, I can't find the link but someone did actually do all the digging on it. If someone could provide it I'd be grateful), then the odds of any single sample chosen is more likely to be his than any other athlete.
KayZeroX wrote:
Let's see how the process will go. Let's see how Armstrong will react when he has to defend against all the evidence and statements made by his former teamm8's and work colleagues.
But the whole point is he isn't defending himself because now that there are witness testimonies form a whole lot of people who have supported him over the years and have no grudge, he really has no one to turn to to corroborate his version of events, except those who are also implicated (such as Bruyneel).
KayZeroX wrote:Let's see how the process will go. Let's see how Armstrong will react when he has to defend against all the evidence and statements made by his former teamm8's and work colleagues.
He will obviously start off by calling it a witch-hunt. Then he will re-iterate that he was never (convicted) of a positive doping test. He will follow that up by bringing up his fight against cancer, and how great his work in that area has been (which obviously has no relevance to this case at all). Then he will most likely try to discredit all the testimonials. In the past he’s done this by claiming the people testifying against him has had a personal interest in doing so. Though I have to admit, I’m a little curious how he will attempt to convince the public that 100 % of the questioned witnesses will have had something to gain by receiving 6 month bans, having their past results revoked and their reputation tainted. Maybe he’ll just skip this point entirely, and rather just go for a frontal attack on USADA and try discrediting them instead, that way he won’t have to rebut any of the actual evidence.
In short; call it a witch-hunt, re-iterate never (convicted) of a positive doping test, fight against cancer, discredit witnesses if possible, frontal attack on USADA to avoid having to rebut the actual evidence.
'I don't think it matters. He is still a legend of the sport. A guy who had cancer came back and won the Tour de France. I think it's not really important and I really don't think it matters.'
'I don't think it matters. He is still a legend of the sport. A guy who had cancer came back and won the Tour de France. I think it's not really important and I really don't think it matters.'
'I don't think it matters. He is still a legend of the sport. A guy who had cancer came back and won the Tour de France. I think it's not really important and I really don't think it matters.'
'I don't think it matters. He is still a legend of the sport. A guy who had cancer came back and won the Tour de France. I think it's not really important and I really don't think it matters.'
'I don't think it matters. He is still a legend of the sport. A guy who had cancer came back and won the Tour de France. I think it's not really important and I really don't think it matters.'
'I don't think it matters. He is still a legend of the sport. A guy who had cancer came back and won the Tour de France. I think it's not really important and I really don't think it matters.'
'I don't think it matters. He is still a legend of the sport. A guy who had cancer came back and won the Tour de France. I think it's not really important and I really don't think it matters.'
Honestly, I get the feeling that a lot of pro cyclists think that, certainly the older generation. Now that doesn't explain Dowsett or excuse him, but be prepared for more cyclists saying stupid things.
I wonder if Dowsett is trying to say that Armstrong inspired him, as they both have come across setbacks (Dowsett has haemophilia) and still managed to have professional careers, only he's chosen the wrong words.
'I don't think it matters. He is still a legend of the sport. A guy who had cancer came back and won the Tour de France. I think it's not really important and I really don't think it matters.'
Honestly, I get the feeling that a lot of pro cyclists think that, certainly the older generation. Now that doesn't explain Dowsett or excuse him, but be prepared for more cyclists saying stupid things.
Have to agree Count, cyclists will say stupid things when it comes to this. Omerta well and truely rocking along
Hells 500 Crew and 6 x Everester
Don Rd Launching Place
Melbourne Hill Rd Warrandyte
Colby Drive Belgrave South
William Rd The Patch
David Hill Rd Monbulk
Lakeside Drive Emerald https://www.everesting.cc/hall-of-fame/
Something tells me Elliott Smith would not have been a Lance fan. I still think the deadline is today for his camp to come out strongly the way they usually do. If they don't, I think he'll do a tell all in the next two weeks or so...
Edited by Deadpool on 11-10-2012 12:50
KayZeroX wrote:
Yes countarach, i completly agree with you.
And indeed he's not defending himself. (I still think he will defend himself in the near future. And that he's not doing so at this time because of all the choas and emotional responses at this time, because it's all pretty fresh.)
No. He isn't defending himself. Ever. - "Today I will turn the page," Armstrong said. "I will no longer address this issue regardless of the circumstances."
KayZeroX wrote:
All those facts you mentioned are clear evidence that he did use doping.
And yet...
KayZeroX wrote:
I just can't believe the facts when i look back at the history of all that's happend.
Somebody allready destroyed my opinion on Armstrongs 3rd place in the TDF 09. (the guy said something about Armstrong also being tested positive in that edition). I have no knowledge of that. So my opinion is based on a clean Armstrong in the TDF 09.
Despite acknowledging that this is evidence and not seeing any way to explain it, because none actually exists, you still refuse to see him as doping. This is where the problem lies. Armstrong has created this myth, this narrative, where he is the "guy who beat cancer and won the Tour de France because he was determined to prove it."
KayZeroX wrote:
I don't know why, but Armstrongs book : "it's not about the bike" made me change my opinion. I believe what is said in that book to be the truth.
After reading it, it made no sense to me anymore that he used doping to win. Cause he allready won...he knows the values of life.
And this is the proof of that. He has created the myth and distributed it in his book and people buy into it - because it is a great story! Who doesn't love the guy who beat cancer and stayed on as a professional athlete?! How could you not like that guy?! But then you think about it for a bit and his defence isn't based on evidence. His entire defence is based on a 'gut instinct' that people have. saint Armstrong can't possibly be lying - after what he has been through how could he be lying? But the fact of the matter is that he is surrounded by a great PR machine which can spin this narrative and beneath it there is nothing.
CLURPR wrote:
Also, has the USADA stripped him of his results from his second comeback too?
Yes
ReasonedDecision wrote:
In this case, as explained above, USADA has found proof beyond a reasonable doubt that Lance Armstrong engaged in serial cheating through the use, administration and trafficking of performance enhancing drugs and methods and that Armstrong and his co-conspirators sought to achieve their ambitions through a massive fraud now more fully exposed. So ends one of the most sordid chapters in sports history.
For the reasons set forth above and in the accompanying file, the United States Anti-Doping Agency has found that Lance Armstrong violated the applicable anti-doping rules, that his competitive results achieved since August 1, 1998, should be, and are, disqualified and that he is properly and appropriately ruled ineligible for life pursuant to the terms of Article 10.10.1 of the World Anti-Doping Code.
This is an interesting article in an Australian paper discussing what I was talking about above - the fact that Armstrong can use charisma and his story to gloss over his complete lack of substance. https://www.news.c...6493713158
I should have realised right then and there that Lance Armstrong was capable of making half the sports fans in the world believe anything. Like a cult leader, the man is dripping in charisma. You don’t just want to like him, you want to believe him.
Lance speaks a bit like a cult leader too, all visionary and big picture with little mention of minor detail.
And the weirder the stuff he says, the more you want to believe it. He told me he believed cancer would be eradicated from the face of the earth in his lifetime thanks to the work of his foundation. I gobbled that one up.
He told the whole world he was never a cheat despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary. Many of us swallowed that one too, myself well and truly included.
[...]
Like I say, though, there was a key difference between this conversation and a normal one. Lance held the psychological upper hand, not just because he was 10 million times more famous and powerful than me, but because he’s got this manner about him. It’s partly the way he looks at you but it’s also about his attitude.
CountArach wrote:
This is an interesting article in an Australian paper discussing what I was talking about above - the fact that Armstrong can use charisma and his story to gloss over his complete lack of substance. https://www.news.c...6493713158
I should have realised right then and there that Lance Armstrong was capable of making half the sports fans in the world believe anything. Like a cult leader, the man is dripping in charisma. You don’t just want to like him, you want to believe him.
Lance speaks a bit like a cult leader too, all visionary and big picture with little mention of minor detail.
And the weirder the stuff he says, the more you want to believe it. He told me he believed cancer would be eradicated from the face of the earth in his lifetime thanks to the work of his foundation. I gobbled that one up.
He told the whole world he was never a cheat despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary. Many of us swallowed that one too, myself well and truly included.
[...]
Like I say, though, there was a key difference between this conversation and a normal one. Lance held the psychological upper hand, not just because he was 10 million times more famous and powerful than me, but because he’s got this manner about him. It’s partly the way he looks at you but it’s also about his attitude.
It's a fascinating article detailing exactly what Livestrong does. Also, if you do read it, this quick followup chat with Charles Pelkey is invaluable:
CountArach wrote:
This is an interesting article in an Australian paper discussing what I was talking about above - the fact that Armstrong can use charisma and his story to gloss over his complete lack of substance. https://www.news.c...6493713158
I should have realised right then and there that Lance Armstrong was capable of making half the sports fans in the world believe anything. Like a cult leader, the man is dripping in charisma. You don’t just want to like him, you want to believe him.
Lance speaks a bit like a cult leader too, all visionary and big picture with little mention of minor detail.
And the weirder the stuff he says, the more you want to believe it. He told me he believed cancer would be eradicated from the face of the earth in his lifetime thanks to the work of his foundation. I gobbled that one up.
He told the whole world he was never a cheat despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary. Many of us swallowed that one too, myself well and truly included.
[...]
Like I say, though, there was a key difference between this conversation and a normal one. Lance held the psychological upper hand, not just because he was 10 million times more famous and powerful than me, but because he’s got this manner about him. It’s partly the way he looks at you but it’s also about his attitude.
Hells 500 Crew and 6 x Everester
Don Rd Launching Place
Melbourne Hill Rd Warrandyte
Colby Drive Belgrave South
William Rd The Patch
David Hill Rd Monbulk
Lakeside Drive Emerald https://www.everesting.cc/hall-of-fame/
