March 29, 2024, 05:11:47 AM

Author Topic: Lance Armstrong  (Read 9093 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline elan

  • Go On ......Get In There!!!!!!!!
  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 11629
  • WaRRioR fOr LiFe!!!!!
    • View Profile
Lance Armstrong
« on: August 24, 2012, 09:00:14 PM »
Lance Armstrong subject to lifetime ban and fan fallout



(CBS News) In a statement released late Thursday night, celebrated cyclist Lance Armstrong announced he would no longer fight charges that he used performance enhancing drugs throughout his esteemed career.


"There comes a point in every man's life when he has to say, enough is enough," Armstrong's statement read. "For me, that time is now."


Also on Thursday night, the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency said it will strip Armstrong of his seven Tour de France titles and Travis Tygart, USADA's chief executive, said Armstrong would be subject to a lifetime ban from the sport.


Friday on "CBS This Morning," CBS News chief investigative correspondent Armen Keteyian said the original charges brought against Armstrong in June were based on "non-analytical evidence" that he used performance enhancing drugs. This evidence reportedly included testimony from several former teammates, including Tyler Hamilton who told "60 Minutes" that he frequently saw Armstrong inject "EPO," a banned naturally occurring hormone known as a blood booster.

   
On Monday, a judge dismissed Armstrong's suit to dismiss the charges. Armstrong has vehemently denied the charges and cites the fact that he has passed over 500 drug tests throughout his esteemed cycling career.


Nike, one of the athlete's biggest sponsors, released a statement of support for Armstrong this week. "Nike plans to continue to support Lance and the Lance Armstrong Foundation," the statement read.


For his part, Armstrong who retired last year, said the USADA does not have the authority to strip him of his titles but in a phone call with "CBS This Morning," Tygart reiterated, "given that he's chosen not to contest, it's a legal fact that he's now disqualified and has a permanent ban from sport competition."


Peter Flax, the editor in chief of Bicycling Magazine, joined "CTM" on Friday to reflect on the fallout. Flax contends that Armstrong is "choosing the least worst option...it's a damage control move" and believes Armstrong is unequivocally guilty of the charges. "I'm absolutely convinced that he did, but I'm also convinced that he is the victim of a witch hunt," Flax said.


Still, Flax said he has seen many messages of support for Armstrong on Bicycling Magazine forums, "95 percent of them are pro-Lance people, communicating their support for him," he said. "He is guilty but in a lot of people's eyes, he's still an inspiration."
« Last Edit: October 17, 2012, 12:38:11 PM by elan »
<a href="https://www.youtube.com/v/blUSVALW_Z4" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" class="bbc_link bbc_flash_disabled new_win">https://www.youtube.com/v/blUSVALW_Z4</a>

Offline elan

  • Go On ......Get In There!!!!!!!!
  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 11629
  • WaRRioR fOr LiFe!!!!!
    • View Profile
Re: Lance Armstrong
« Reply #1 on: August 24, 2012, 09:01:38 PM »
This dude has been doped up for a long time. But he is a golden boy and got protection, even Nike is sticking by him. Yet they crucify Bonds (though he a clown).
<a href="https://www.youtube.com/v/blUSVALW_Z4" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" class="bbc_link bbc_flash_disabled new_win">https://www.youtube.com/v/blUSVALW_Z4</a>

truetrini

  • Guest
Re: Lance Armstrong
« Reply #2 on: August 24, 2012, 09:30:34 PM »
Bonds and Armstrong is two completely cases.

Armstrong has never tested positive  (neither has Marion Jones)  but in all fairness, what is the standard?

Is drug testing the standard?  if it is what standard they holding Armstrong to?


Offline elan

  • Go On ......Get In There!!!!!!!!
  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 11629
  • WaRRioR fOr LiFe!!!!!
    • View Profile
Re: Lance Armstrong
« Reply #3 on: August 24, 2012, 09:49:16 PM »
Bonds and Armstrong is two completely cases.

Armstrong has never tested positive  (neither has Marion Jones)  but in all fairness, what is the standard?

Is drug testing the standard?  if it is what standard they holding Armstrong to?



Eventually they said they found documnets at Balco that stated Bond had failed drug tests. Marion never failed and got banned, so there is your standard.
<a href="https://www.youtube.com/v/blUSVALW_Z4" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" class="bbc_link bbc_flash_disabled new_win">https://www.youtube.com/v/blUSVALW_Z4</a>

truetrini

  • Guest
Re: Lance Armstrong
« Reply #4 on: August 25, 2012, 12:07:00 AM »
Marion admitted drug use and to lying to a grand jury.   Armstrong did not do either.

Where is the standard?


Later reports on Bonds' leaked grand-jury testimony contend that he admitted to unknowingly using "the cream" and "the clear"

In July 2005, all four defendants in the BALCO steroid scandal trial, including Anderson, struck deals with federal prosecutors that did not require them to reveal names of athletes who may have used banned drugs.

Anyway i was just playing devil's advocate.

The anti doping folks say that based on blood samples from 2009 and 2010, and testimonies from other cyclists, that they have a case.
« Last Edit: August 25, 2012, 12:11:26 AM by truetrini SC »

Offline fishs

  • I believe in the stars in the dark night.
  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 3856
    • View Profile
Re: Lance Armstrong
« Reply #5 on: August 25, 2012, 01:12:32 AM »
Marion admitted drug use and to lying to a grand jury.   Armstrong did not do either.

Where is the standard?


Later reports on Bonds' leaked grand-jury testimony contend that he admitted to unknowingly using "the cream" and "the clear"

In July 2005, all four defendants in the BALCO steroid scandal trial, including Anderson, struck deals with federal prosecutors that did not require them to reveal names of athletes who may have used banned drugs.

Anyway i was just playing devil's advocate.

The anti doping folks say that based on blood samples from 2009 and 2010, and testimonies from other cyclists, that they have a case.

The last tour de France Amstrong won, I remember on the last hill section that he had to win to get the yellow jersey, half way through everybody struggling all of a sudden from in the middle pack he make a move and win the stage. what was remarkable for me was how he was able to just turn on the power and cruise past all the other riders almost Ben Johnson like.
Ah want de woman on de bass

Offline Blue

  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 3216
    • View Profile
Re: Lance Armstrong
« Reply #6 on: August 25, 2012, 01:14:53 AM »
Bonds and Armstrong is two completely cases.

Armstrong has never tested positive  (neither has Marion Jones)  but in all fairness, what is the standard?

Is drug testing the standard?  if it is what standard they holding Armstrong to?



Has never tested positive even though the USADA say they have 38 samples that are entirely consistent with blood doping?

When 10 of your teammates are ready to testify against you, that's not a good sign.

Offline Conquering Lion

  • Tell me how can a man who doh know his roots form his own ideology?
  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 674
    • View Profile
Re: Lance Armstrong
« Reply #7 on: August 25, 2012, 03:12:35 PM »
If he had stayed retired there would be nothing they could do because of the statute of limitations. When he came out of retirement he reset the clock on the limitations and it allowed them to (I assume) retest past samples and make a case.

But I agree there is somewhat of a double standard.
We fire de old set ah managers we had wukkin..and iz ah new group we went and we bring in. And if the goods we require de new managers not supplying, when election time come back round iz new ones we bringin. For iz one ting about my people I can guarantee..They will never ever vote party b4 country

Offline pecan

  • Steups ...
  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 6855
  • Billy Goats Gruff
    • View Profile
Re: Lance Armstrong
« Reply #8 on: August 25, 2012, 03:44:44 PM »
Two Armstrongs in the news today
Now faith is being sure of what we hope for and certain of what we do not see.

Offline Bakes

  • Promethean...
  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 21980
    • View Profile
Re: Lance Armstrong
« Reply #9 on: August 25, 2012, 04:40:46 PM »
If he had stayed retired there would be nothing they could do because of the statute of limitations. When he came out of retirement he reset the clock on the limitations and it allowed them to (I assume) retest past samples and make a case.

But I agree there is somewhat of a double standard.

Statute of limitations doesn't apply in this scenario.

Offline Conquering Lion

  • Tell me how can a man who doh know his roots form his own ideology?
  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 674
    • View Profile
Re: Lance Armstrong
« Reply #10 on: August 25, 2012, 05:00:57 PM »
We fire de old set ah managers we had wukkin..and iz ah new group we went and we bring in. And if the goods we require de new managers not supplying, when election time come back round iz new ones we bringin. For iz one ting about my people I can guarantee..They will never ever vote party b4 country

truetrini

  • Guest
Re: Lance Armstrong
« Reply #11 on: August 25, 2012, 05:28:35 PM »
The USDA moved hard and fast because according to the rules, they had until end of this year to deal with Armstrong...well so I have heard and I have also heard that the clock was reset due to his comeback also.

Offline D.H.W

  • Forever Man Utd
  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 17937
  • "Luck Favours The Prepared"
    • View Profile
Re: Lance Armstrong
« Reply #12 on: August 25, 2012, 05:50:17 PM »
I find it strange, that they have no evidence, only what his team mates say. But he get ban? Or I'm I missing something?
"Evil is powerless if the good are unafraid."
Youtube Channel


Offline Bakes

  • Promethean...
  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 21980
    • View Profile
Re: Lance Armstrong
« Reply #13 on: August 25, 2012, 06:49:09 PM »
I find it strange, that they have no evidence, only what his team mates say. But he get ban? Or I'm I missing something?

What his team mates say is evidence...indirect evidence.  What you referring to is DIRECT evidence, the lack of which isn't all that unusual.  Even in criminal cases, most cases are solved by indirect (or "circumstantial") evidence, as opposed to direct evidence (DNA, video etc.).

The indirect evidence they had lined up was overwhelming:

Quote
“At the end of the day, a lot of people knew the truth, but they were silenced by the internal pressure from the team to keep everything secret,” Tygart said, adding, “This is the most witnesses we’ve ever had in any case come forward.”

Tygart would not divulge the names of any of the witnesses. But one thing was clear: they were the crux of the antidoping agency’s evidence against Armstrong. And in the doping world, that is known as a nonanalytical positive — an athlete implicated not by a positive drug test but by supporting evidence.

In recent years, it has become the new way to catch athletes who cheat.


“Science can’t decide everything,” David Howman, director general of the World Anti-Doping Agency, said. “These days, you need to complement a testing program with the gathering of evidence with other methods. To build your case, you put together strands that make one strong rope.”

...The antidoping agency has said its evidence includes blood profiles from 2009 and 2010 that were consistent with doping, which means they showed blood results that were outside his normal range.

This is not an adverse finding, but this is certainly a sufficient equivalent to testing positive,” said Christiane Ayotte, the head of a World Anti-Doping Agency-accredited lab outside Montreal. “We’re at the point that if we’re not using these indirect markers, you can just forget about a case. For example, oral testosterone and microdoses of EPO will be detectable for only 12 hours. You just about have to be there when the athlete is doping to catch them.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/25/sports/cycling/antidoping-officials-move-to-wipe-out-armstrongs-titles.html?src=me&ref=sports


Quote
According to the letter, "Armstrong's doping is further evidenced by the data from blood collections obtained by the UCI" -- the sport's governing body -- "in 2009 and 2010. This data is fully consistent with blood manipulation and EPO use and/or blood transfusions."

Read more: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2012/writers/austin_murphy/06/14/usada-versus-lance-armstrong/index.html#ixzz24bjeka1h




Offline Bakes

  • Promethean...
  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 21980
    • View Profile
Re: Lance Armstrong
« Reply #14 on: August 25, 2012, 06:55:50 PM »
If he had stayed retired there would be nothing they could do because of the statute of limitations. When he came out of retirement he reset the clock on the limitations and it allowed them to (I assume) retest past samples and make a case.

But I agree there is somewhat of a double standard.

The USDA moved hard and fast because according to the rules, they had until end of this year to deal with Armstrong...well so I have heard and I have also heard that the clock was reset due to his comeback also.


You are both correct in that there is an 8-year statute of limitations:


Quote
ARTICLE 17 STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS
No action may be commenced against an Athlete or other Person for a violation of an anti-doping rule contained in the Code unless such action is commenced within eight years from the date the violation occurred.

So yes, they had to act before the 8-year anniversary of his last Tour win back in 2005, meaning June(?) of next year.  I don't think it matters that he came out of retirement, unless USADA would have alleged that he was still doping after he came out of retirement.  Whenever the last alleged violation took place, that's the date from which the clock would start counting. So yes, if they claimed he was still doping after he came back then that would have extended the clock beyond June of next year.

Offline Bakes

  • Promethean...
  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 21980
    • View Profile
Re: Lance Armstrong
« Reply #15 on: August 25, 2012, 07:35:46 PM »
Quote
During the 1999 Tour, O’Reilly said, her workload had been lightened when one cyclist, the aforementioned Vaughters, dropped out of the race. That left her more time to minister to Armstrong and one other rider. On the team bus, she claimed, she heard several top team officials fretting about a positive test by Armstrong for steroids. They were in a panic, saying: “What are we going to do? What are we going to do?” Their solution was to get one of their compliant doctors to issue a prescription for a steroid-based ointment to combat saddle sores. If Armstrong had saddle sores, O’Reilly said, she would have known.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/25/sports/cycling/armstrong-best-of-his-time-now-with-an-asterisk-george-vecsey.html?ref=sports

truetrini

  • Guest
Re: Lance Armstrong
« Reply #16 on: August 26, 2012, 11:43:30 AM »
Lance was still the best of his time..as all the other contenders to his drug throne were also all drugging and most if not all were caught and convicted drug cheats.

There are very few clean riders in the Tour De Farce

Offline D.H.W

  • Forever Man Utd
  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 17937
  • "Luck Favours The Prepared"
    • View Profile
Re: Lance Armstrong
« Reply #17 on: August 26, 2012, 12:42:19 PM »
His drugs were better. American made
"Evil is powerless if the good are unafraid."
Youtube Channel


truetrini

  • Guest
Re: Lance Armstrong
« Reply #18 on: August 26, 2012, 12:47:53 PM »
His drugs were better. American made

lol

Offline elan

  • Go On ......Get In There!!!!!!!!
  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 11629
  • WaRRioR fOr LiFe!!!!!
    • View Profile
Re: Lance Armstrong
« Reply #19 on: October 17, 2012, 12:37:19 PM »
Nike drops Lance Armstrong, who steps down from Livestrong
Posted by Cindy Boren on October 17, 2012 



Nike has terminated its contract with Lance Armstrong, citing “seemingly insurmountable evidence” that he “participated in doping and misled” the company.

The Oregon-based company announced the termination of its long relationship with Armstrong shortly after he announced that he was resigning as head of his Livestrong cancer charity.

Nike, in a statement on its website, said:

“Due to the seemingly insurmountable evidence that Lance Armstrong participated in doping and misled Nike for more than a decade, it is with great sadness that we have terminated our contract with him. Nike does not condone the use of illegal performance enhancing drugs in any manner. Nike plans to continue support of the Livestrong initiatives created to unite, inspire and empower people affected by cancer.”

Armstrong resigned as chairman of Livestrong a week after a U.S. Anti-Doping Agency report called the former champion cyclist the driving force behind “the most sophisticated, professionalized and successful doping program that sport has ever seen.”

In announcing his resignation, Armstrong said in a statement:  ”This organization, its mission and its supporters are incredibly dear to my heart. Today therefore, to spare the foundation any negative effects as a result of controversy surrounding my cycling career, I will conclude my chairmanship.”

The USADA report made public its investigation into allegations that have swirled about Armstrong for years and portrayed Armstrong as the leader of his team’s doping efforts. The report contains statements from 26 witnesses, including 11 former teammates. Armstrong has always denied doping, but gave up the fight against the allegations in August.

Armstrong, who survived testicular cancer that had spread to his brain and lungs before becoming a champion cyclist, received no salary as chairman of the Lance Armstrong Foundation and will remain on its 15-member board. Vice chairman Jeff Garvey, the founding chairman in 1997, will assume his duties. Garvey will assume strategic-planning duties and will take over some of Armstrong’s public appearances and meetings.

Nike’s decision to sever its long relationship with Armstrong comes a day after a New York Daily News report that alleged the company paid $500,000 to help cover up a positive drug test. Kathy LeMond, wife of cyclist Greg LeMond, had testified under oath during a 2006 deposition that Nike paid Hein Verbruggen, the former head of the international cycling union, $500,000 to cover up the positive result.

“Nike vehemently denies that it paid former UCI president Hein Verbruggen $500,000 to cover up a positive drug test,” it said in a statement, according to the Daily News. “Nike does not condone the use of illegal performance enhancing drugs.”

Nike’s decision to sever ties with Armstrong is similar to the one it made with another celebrated hero. The name of Joe Paterno, the late former Penn State coach, was removed from the child-care center at Nike’s Oregon headquarters and now, ESPN’s Darren Rovell reports, the company will remove Armstrong’s name from its fitness center.

On Tuesday, Paul Willerton, a former teammate of Armstrong’s, led a small demonstration outside Nike headquarters, calling for the company to sever its ties with Armstrong. ”Nike should not condone the behavior that Lance Armstrong has demonstrated for so long,” Willerton told the Daily News. “To see Nike take this stance now is disgusting. Nike’s materials have stood for some of the greatest things you can stand for as a company. A clean sport should be another one of those things.”

The only other athlete Nike appears to have severed ties with is Michael Vick, the Philadelphia Eagles’ quarterback who served a federal prison sentence for his involvement in dog fighting. Nike re-signed Vick.
« Last Edit: October 17, 2012, 12:39:05 PM by elan »
<a href="https://www.youtube.com/v/blUSVALW_Z4" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" class="bbc_link bbc_flash_disabled new_win">https://www.youtube.com/v/blUSVALW_Z4</a>

Offline asylumseeker

  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 18073
    • View Profile
Re: Lance Armstrong
« Reply #20 on: October 17, 2012, 12:51:00 PM »
All good.

Offline Bakes

  • Promethean...
  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 21980
    • View Profile
Re: Lance Armstrong
« Reply #21 on: October 17, 2012, 01:02:09 PM »
Correct result in both instances.. as I posted elsewhere today.

giggsy11

  • Guest
Re: Lance Armstrong
« Reply #22 on: October 17, 2012, 01:07:41 PM »
It is amazing how many people out there still drinking the Lance Armstrong koolaid and in denial even after the report came out. Blasted cheat! Nike never got my money and never will.

Offline D.H.W

  • Forever Man Utd
  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 17937
  • "Luck Favours The Prepared"
    • View Profile
Re: Lance Armstrong
« Reply #23 on: October 17, 2012, 01:46:58 PM »
Guess which clothing sponser all these athletes had in common. Nike

Marion Jones, Kelli White, Tim Montgomery, lance Armstrong, Tiger Woods, Barry Bonds, Regina Jacobs, CJ hunter, Justin Gatlin, Chryste Gains, Torri Edwards, the list goes on....
"Evil is powerless if the good are unafraid."
Youtube Channel


Offline Bakes

  • Promethean...
  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 21980
    • View Profile
Re: Lance Armstrong
« Reply #24 on: October 17, 2012, 04:54:35 PM »
Guess which clothing sponser all these athletes had in common. Nike

Marion Jones, Kelli White, Tim Montgomery, lance Armstrong, Tiger Woods, Barry Bonds, Regina Jacobs, CJ hunter, Justin Gatlin, Chryste Gains, Torri Edwards, the list goes on....


Doesn't really mean anything...

Offline Conquering Lion

  • Tell me how can a man who doh know his roots form his own ideology?
  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 674
    • View Profile
Re: Lance Armstrong
« Reply #25 on: October 17, 2012, 05:26:05 PM »
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b01ngqxd


About 2 hours long but a real interesting listen.

Look up the Festina affair, Christophe Basson and Filippo Simeone.
We fire de old set ah managers we had wukkin..and iz ah new group we went and we bring in. And if the goods we require de new managers not supplying, when election time come back round iz new ones we bringin. For iz one ting about my people I can guarantee..They will never ever vote party b4 country

Offline elan

  • Go On ......Get In There!!!!!!!!
  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 11629
  • WaRRioR fOr LiFe!!!!!
    • View Profile
Re: Lance Armstrong
« Reply #26 on: October 18, 2012, 12:13:00 PM »
It's amazing how the media just keep glossing over this. Where's ESPN with all the updates and analysis, and indepth look at how such an event unfolded.

Tiger dominated the air for week without cease, so to did Michael Vick, Bonds. Why no uproar?

Shouldn't Livestrong be renamed, since it was built on Liestrong?
<a href="https://www.youtube.com/v/blUSVALW_Z4" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" class="bbc_link bbc_flash_disabled new_win">https://www.youtube.com/v/blUSVALW_Z4</a>

truetrini

  • Guest
Re: Lance Armstrong
« Reply #27 on: October 18, 2012, 12:43:58 PM »

Offline Bakes

  • Promethean...
  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 21980
    • View Profile
Re: Lance Armstrong
« Reply #28 on: October 18, 2012, 12:45:33 PM »
It's amazing how the media just keep glossing over this. Where's ESPN with all the updates and analysis, and indepth look at how such an event unfolded.

Tiger dominated the air for week without cease, so to did Michael Vick, Bonds. Why no uproar?

Shouldn't Livestrong be renamed, since it was built on Liestrong?

Sometimes I feel you have ah inferiority complex yes fella. 

1) Both Tiger and Bonds were still active at the times of their investigation, Armstrong retire 2-3 years ago. 
2) Bonds eventually retired before the investigation wrapped up, but his were criminal charges.  Armstrong hasn't been charged with a crime... yet.
3) Back then people were already tuning out doping cases... the public kinda over it now, not really that 'news' worthy now.
4) Both Baseball and Golf are bigger than cycling... Armstrong is a big name because he American and because he dominated the sport, but in the grand scheme of things nobody really care about cycling (who was the last person to win the Tour befor Armstrong won his 7 straight?  Who won after he did... can you answer those without Googling?).

Offline Deeks

  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 18631
    • View Profile
Re: Lance Armstrong
« Reply #29 on: October 18, 2012, 03:31:19 PM »
but in the grand scheme of things nobody really care about cycling

Bakes, the French did. They did not mind an outsider winning one or two Tours, but for "un Americain" to dominate their national pastime "est sacre bleu". It use to drive them crazy. Some of the fans used to scream "...dupee, dupee..." when he passing by.

 

1]; } ?>