|
Armstrong stops fighting doping charges - USADA wants him banned and stripped for titles
|
| Mresuperstar |
Posted on 24-08-2012 12:42
|
Grand Tour Champion
Posts: 8059
Joined: 22-06-2009
PCM$: 650.00
|
CLURPR wrote:
So basically the USADA is stripping the titles from one doper so they can be given to another doper. They have really hit the nail on the head there.
This is my opinion. I always wished Lance was innocent, but it's pretty clear now that he wasn't. I'm just angry that he was to give up titles to other riders that most likely doped as well. Why ruin the history of the sport. Let him keep his titles and put an * next to his name or something. This was the doping era so why not full clean up the sport now so we don't have to go back again 5-10 years from now to determine who the real "winner" was.
Clean up the sport NOW, leave history and the PAST alone.
|
| |
|
|
| Aquarius |
Posted on 24-08-2012 12:47
|
Grand Tour Specialist
Posts: 5220
Joined: 29-11-2006
PCM$: 200.00
|
Mresuperstar wrote:
Clean up the sport NOW, leave history and the PAST alone.
Sadly, cheaters and/or dopers are always or almost always one length further than anticheat/doping organisations, so retroactive investigations are the only efficient way to bust cheaters at some point.
Better late than never. |
| |
|
|
| cactus-jack |
Posted on 24-08-2012 12:48
|
Classics Specialist
Posts: 3936
Joined: 31-07-2009
PCM$: 200.00
|
I think it's both good and bad for the sport that Armstrong is "caught". I don't really know what word to use since he isn't really caught, but I'll use it in lack of a better word.
The message this sends out to those who doesn't really follow cycling, but do watch the TdF, is a mixed one. The good thing is that this showes how cycling can, and will, "settle the score" so to speak. The sport doesn't try to hide away from former disgraces, but is willing to bring it out into the open no matter how painfull it might be.
It also showes that even a rider such as Lance Armstrong cannot be safe. With his entire backstory coupled with his unbelievable athletic achivement he has a standing like no one else. If he can be taken down then so can everyone.
There is something negative to be taken from this two. I believe cycling "needed" a clean Armstrong. Again, with his backstory he has reached a far bigger audience than any other cyclist could. People who have never seen a single race before knows who he is. Some might describe him as a "shining beacon", that one guy who beat the odds time and time again, a real comeback kid.
However, the effects might not be so negative after all. I have a certain amount of hope that the fact that Armstrong was finally brought down might weigh heavier than the loss of an icon.
There's a fine line between "psychotherapist" and "psycho the rapist"
|
| |
|
|
| Mresuperstar |
Posted on 24-08-2012 12:51
|
Grand Tour Champion
Posts: 8059
Joined: 22-06-2009
PCM$: 650.00
|
Just found this, Armstrong's official statement he posted on his blog.
https://lancearmst...st-23-2012
|
| |
|
|
| SportingNonsense |
Posted on 24-08-2012 12:51
|
Team Manager
Posts: 33046
Joined: 08-03-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
Mresuperstar wrote:
Clean up the sport NOW, leave history and the PAST alone.
The USADA investigation is doing exactly that though. Armstrong is merely one of those involved - others like Bruyneel being investigated are still active today. Theyre cleaning up the sport today, with the added bonus of exposing cheats from the past.
|
| |
|
|
| Aquarius |
Posted on 24-08-2012 12:55
|
Grand Tour Specialist
Posts: 5220
Joined: 29-11-2006
PCM$: 200.00
|
kolnierz wrote:
Yeah, 27 people voted innocent and almost none of them feel like this discussion is worth their opinion?Cool
I voted that he is/was innocent. But I don't know all facts, as it was pointed to me some time ago.
I just don't "belive" in that, if someone could give me a reason to change my mind i'll do it. But for now, as much as i know there is only some "contaminated" blood tests and words of other dopers. I couldn't find any proof in strict definition of it. I hope he's innocent, until some fact or judge statement won't convince me to change that opinion. That's all, this discussion is pointless (I think) becouse, all of us has only own opinions and reasons to just "belive" in some answers.
I think you should read this (plus the messages above and under) :
https://pcmdaily.c...ost_524419
That might not change your opinion, but should learn you much about Armstrong's doings. |
| |
|
|
| Kami |
Posted on 24-08-2012 12:56
|
Classics Specialist
Posts: 3485
Joined: 19-06-2009
PCM$: 200.00
|
Personally, i don't know if this will do more good than harm to the sport. He was like the biggest cycling personality in the last 20-30 years. Making cycling way more popular to the general public. Add to that the his Livestrong project and you got yourself a modern day hero.
While i'd like to see him 'busted', i don't think this will help cycling in any way.
|
| |
|
|
| Aquarius |
Posted on 24-08-2012 12:57
|
Grand Tour Specialist
Posts: 5220
Joined: 29-11-2006
PCM$: 200.00
|
Kami wrote:
While i'd like to see him 'busted', i don't think this will help cycling in any way. Credibility goes a long way you know.
Cycling needed a clean Armstrong, a hero, etc. but he wasn't that, no point in making it up any longer. |
| |
|
|
| Ad Bot |
Posted on 25-11-2024 11:49
|
Bot Agent
Posts: Countless
Joined: 23.11.09
|
|
| IP: None |
|
|
| kumazan |
Posted on 24-08-2012 12:59
|
Team Leader
Posts: 6662
Joined: 02-07-2009
PCM$: 200.00
|
A summary:
"I never tested positive". Repeat for 4 paragraphs.
"It's a witch hunt, they don't have any evidence".
"I have my Fundation about cancer, remember, I'm a good person".
|
| |
|
|
| wackojackohighcliffe |
Posted on 24-08-2012 13:02
|
Grand Tour Champion
Posts: 7681
Joined: 19-02-2008
PCM$: 200.00
|
Aquarius wrote:
wackojackohighcliffe wrote:
Avin Wargunnson wrote:
CountArach wrote:
Also wow, there are 6 people who said that they think he didn't dope. That is more than I thought were still out there.
I dont get these lunatics.  Seven now...
Why the hell you are such a pussy Armstrong and you refuse to go to the court? Better to keep saying i am innocent victim of the witchhunt? Moron...
I think he should also pay the prize money he got for his wins at least.
He's not really being a pussy - he's being clever. He doesn't want most of America to actually know the details of the case. He wants to be able sit there and say it's a witchhunt and that USADA are chasing after him because of a personal vendetta/they hate America/they love cancer. If he goes to court and loses, then the whole of the USA will hear about how their cancer-beating hero was a cheat like everyone else. And Armstrong will no longer be powerful or important.
Where's the "I like this post - I wish I had written it myself" button ?
Don't worry, that's enough to boost my ego for the day  |
| |
|
|
| cactus-jack |
Posted on 24-08-2012 13:03
|
Classics Specialist
Posts: 3936
Joined: 31-07-2009
PCM$: 200.00
|
Isn't that the same things he has been saying for goo knows how long? That goes for his followers to.
I think that Lance has hurt his own case somewhat by going on with this "witch hunt". It seems to me that while agencies like USADA has come up with reasonable arguements, Armstrong has only fired back with what I think is childish accusations.
There's a fine line between "psychotherapist" and "psycho the rapist"
|
| |
|
|
| Avin Wargunnson |
Posted on 24-08-2012 13:04
|
World Champion
Posts: 14236
Joined: 20-06-2011
PCM$: 300.00
|
kumazan wrote:
A summary:
"I never tested positive". Repeat for 4 paragraphs.
"It's a witch hunt, they don't have any evidence".
"I have my Fundation about cancer, remember, I'm a good person".
In an image summary:
Edited by Avin Wargunnson on 24-08-2012 14:24
|
| |
|
|
| laidbackmarc |
Posted on 24-08-2012 13:39
|
Protected Rider
Posts: 1041
Joined: 07-03-2011
PCM$: 200.00
|
beagle wrote:
laidbackmarc wrote:
Armstrong doped and so did the rest between 1999 and 2006. All results in this period, and a couple of years before should be deleted and forgotten. Let's draw a line over all of it and look forward instead, Armstrong, Ullrich and Riis etc. shouldn't be remembered as champions. They should rather be remembered as the best cheaters in a period full of cheaters, according to my opinion.
only a couple of years before?  or are you so naive to think that Merckx, Anquetil, Bobet, Indurain, Lemond, Fignon and many others were clean? shouldn´t they be forgotten as well then?
Late answer but, I am not that naïve. I know about Merckx and Anquetil driving on different drugs and other things. I wrote "a couple of years ago" mainly because of three reasons:
1. I wasn't born back then.
2. WADA didn't existed back then, so it wasn't cheating once upon a time...
3. They didn't test riders
|
| |
|
|
| Aquarius |
Posted on 24-08-2012 13:45
|
Grand Tour Specialist
Posts: 5220
Joined: 29-11-2006
PCM$: 200.00
|
1. Right
2. Wrong
3. Wrong |
| |
|
|
| laidbackmarc |
Posted on 24-08-2012 13:47
|
Protected Rider
Posts: 1041
Joined: 07-03-2011
PCM$: 200.00
|
Aquarius wrote:
1. Right
2. Wrong
3. Wrong
Oops didn't know that. However, great to see that I was right on the first one, at least.
|
| |
|
|
| Aquarius |
Posted on 24-08-2012 13:52
|
Grand Tour Specialist
Posts: 5220
Joined: 29-11-2006
PCM$: 200.00
|
Unless you're a liar.
WADA didn't exist, but the fight against doping was already going on (in France and most European countries it lasts since the mid-60's), and doping was illegal.
WADA is just the head institution created in the early 2000's that issues global rules, before each sport had its federation dealing with doping matters, and IOC above them all. |
| |
|
|
| Eden95 |
Posted on 24-08-2012 14:04
|
Grand Tour Specialist
Posts: 4505
Joined: 05-10-2010
PCM$: 900.00
|
Aquarius wrote:
Mresuperstar wrote:
Clean up the sport NOW, leave history and the PAST alone.
Sadly, cheaters and/or dopers are always or almost always one length further than anticheat/doping organisations, so retroactive investigations are the only efficient way to bust cheaters at some point.
Better late than never.
That's why with the Olympics they test the samples from athletes 8 years later.
Indosat - ANZ HQ
"This Schleck sandwich is going to cause serious indigestion for Evans" - Phil Liggett |
| |
|
|
| kolnierz |
Posted on 24-08-2012 14:07
|
Amateur
Posts: 13
Joined: 14-03-2008
PCM$: 200.00
|
Aquarius wrote:
kolnierz wrote:
Yeah, 27 people voted innocent and almost none of them feel like this discussion is worth their opinion?Cool
I voted that he is/was innocent. But I don't know all facts, as it was pointed to me some time ago.
I just don't "belive" in that, if someone could give me a reason to change my mind i'll do it. But for now, as much as i know there is only some "contaminated" blood tests and words of other dopers. I couldn't find any proof in strict definition of it. I hope he's innocent, until some fact or judge statement won't convince me to change that opinion. That's all, this discussion is pointless (I think) becouse, all of us has only own opinions and reasons to just "belive" in some answers.
I think you should read this (plus the messages above and under) :
https://pcmdaily.c...ost_524419
That might not change your opinion, but should learn you much about Armstrong's doings.
OK, this post is "a bit" confusing. But may I ask: issoisso is some kind of a specialist, is there any actual prove of those facts that are mentioned? Becouse -I think - all those opinion/proofs/facts is some kind of conspiracy theory that may be aswell created by media and some companies that really want to destroy Armstrong as a person. I really give a f**k is he take drugs or not, its not my buissness. I only worried about people who belived him and try to be like him. If everyone agree that he took that drugs, so what if everyone else do so aswell? |
| |
|
|
| CountArach |
Posted on 24-08-2012 14:14
|
Grand Tour Champion
Posts: 8290
Joined: 14-07-2008
PCM$: 200.00
|
kolnierz wrote:
Aquarius wrote:
kolnierz wrote:
Yeah, 27 people voted innocent and almost none of them feel like this discussion is worth their opinion?Cool
I voted that he is/was innocent. But I don't know all facts, as it was pointed to me some time ago.
I just don't "belive" in that, if someone could give me a reason to change my mind i'll do it. But for now, as much as i know there is only some "contaminated" blood tests and words of other dopers. I couldn't find any proof in strict definition of it. I hope he's innocent, until some fact or judge statement won't convince me to change that opinion. That's all, this discussion is pointless (I think) becouse, all of us has only own opinions and reasons to just "belive" in some answers.
I think you should read this (plus the messages above and under) :
https://pcmdaily.c...ost_524419
That might not change your opinion, but should learn you much about Armstrong's doings.
OK, this post is "a bit" confusing. But may I ask: issoisso is some kind of a specialist, is there any actual prove of those facts that are mentioned? Becouse - I think - all those opinion/proofs/facts is some kind of conspiracy theory that may be aswell created by media and some companies that really want to destroy Armstrong as a person. I really give a f**k is he take drugs or not, its not my buissness. I only worried about people who belived him and try to be like him. If everyone agree that he took that drugs, so what if everyone else do so aswell?
Issoisso isn't an expert, but he knows what he is talked about and everything there is documented.
To dispel that last point, drugs have different effects on different people and thus Armstrong's physiology reacting better to the drugs is why he performed better, and the point is null.
|
| |
|
|
| wackojackohighcliffe |
Posted on 24-08-2012 14:23
|
Grand Tour Champion
Posts: 7681
Joined: 19-02-2008
PCM$: 200.00
|
CountArach wrote:
kolnierz wrote:
Aquarius wrote:
kolnierz wrote:
Yeah, 27 people voted innocent and almost none of them feel like this discussion is worth their opinion?Cool
I voted that he is/was innocent. But I don't know all facts, as it was pointed to me some time ago.
I just don't "belive" in that, if someone could give me a reason to change my mind i'll do it. But for now, as much as i know there is only some "contaminated" blood tests and words of other dopers. I couldn't find any proof in strict definition of it. I hope he's innocent, until some fact or judge statement won't convince me to change that opinion. That's all, this discussion is pointless (I think) becouse, all of us has only own opinions and reasons to just "belive" in some answers.
I think you should read this (plus the messages above and under) :
https://pcmdaily.c...ost_524419
That might not change your opinion, but should learn you much about Armstrong's doings.
OK, this post is "a bit" confusing. But may I ask: issoisso is some kind of a specialist, is there any actual prove of those facts that are mentioned? Becouse - I think - all those opinion/proofs/facts is some kind of conspiracy theory that may be aswell created by media and some companies that really want to destroy Armstrong as a person. I really give a f**k is he take drugs or not, its not my buissness. I only worried about people who belived him and try to be like him. If everyone agree that he took that drugs, so what if everyone else do so aswell?
Issoisso isn't an expert, but he knows what he is talked about and everything there is documented.
To dispel that last point, drugs have different effects on different people and thus Armstrong's physiology reacting better to the drugs is why he performed better, and the point is null.
Could we have some fact for the last point please? |
| |
|
