The case against Lance Armstrong

[ghost]

Fuckers should stop asking him about it after reading that.  There's nothing left to say.  And if he does dope he will lose all that stuff. 

[Salamok]

Yeah pardon me if I think he's full of shit. The first go-to now when confronted is to become vehemently defensive. After seeing this exact kind of response with baseball players, I don't buy it from anybody. Words are wind, especially angry ones. Prove it.

Unfortunately when that doesn't work the 2nd line of defence is to rat someone out higher up the food chain in exchange for leniency.  I can only imagine the amount of pressure that is put upon these "witnesses" to find another scapegoat.

[Paelos]

Fuckers should stop asking him about it after reading that.  There's nothing left to say.  And if he does dope he will lose all that stuff. 

He could still be lying dude. All the words in the world don't matter. Tests matter.

[ghost]

Fuckers should stop asking him about it after reading that.  There's nothing left to say.  And if he does dope he will lose all that stuff.  

He could still be lying dude. All the words in the world don't matter. Tests matter.

Apparently tests don't matter.  Just ask Lance.  

And I never said that he might not be lying.  I'm certainly not going to take that statement at face value.  All the evidence is there to suggest that he (and his team) might be doping, but the point is that his statement doesn't leave any wiggle room.  There's nothing left to say so why ask again?  He's either lying or he isn't.  And Wiggo's right, he'll get majorly fucked if he is doping, unlike guys like Richard Veranque who never came out with this sort of idiotic statement in the first place.  

[DraconianOne]

He could still be lying dude. All the words in the world don't matter. Tests matter.

Do you really think he's not getting tested at the moment on a daily basis? A review of TdF guidelines

Every rider in the Tour is tested for banned substances prior to the race. Various cyclists are tested after every stage, according to a selection process determined before the race. Under current rules, at least 180 urine drug tests are given, including daily drug tests for the race leader and stage winner and six to eight cyclists selected at random throughout the field.

Or are you going to switch to the argument that "he's somehow fooled the tests" or "he doped during training and didn't get tested"? There's absolutely no way a clean, successful athlete can win against that level of cynicism. So yeah, he might be lying but there's also a distinct possibility that he's not.

[Paelos]

The skepticism comes from the fact they hired the same doctor that was in the middle of the Dutch scandal. And that more than half of the last 8 winners have been doping.

[ghost]

Armstrong passed a multitude of tests.  Testing is mostly irrelevant except for those who are stupid enough to get caught. 

I personally will assume that Wiggins and co. are innocent until something serious comes out.

[DraconianOne]

Direct question then, Paelos - what would it actually take for you to give someone like Wiggins the benefit of the doubt? Is it even possible? This is a man who has been open about past alcohol problems. This is a man who voluntarily published his own blood test values from the 2009 TdF to show he was clean. "Tests matter" you said - but do you actually believe that or do you just believe that they're all doping cheaters waiting to get caught?

[Paelos]

1 - He didn't join Team Sky until after December 2009. His blood tests before that are irrelevant.
2 - Team Sky hired a doctor with a past history of doping. Why do that?
3 - I don't believe they are all doping cheaters, but when more than half of the last eight are proven dopers, it's no longer innocent until proven guilty in my mind. The majority WERE guilty.
4 - Publish the tests. Publish them all every day. Publish names, records, etc. Make it transparent and throw out anybody who doesn't live up to that standard.

[Ingmar]

Medical privacy laws make #4 a no go.

[Paelos]

Medical privacy laws make #4 a no go.

Which law specifically does that violate?

[Ingmar]

HIPAA for one (I am pretty sure anyway - not a lawyer). I would happily bet money that other countries that have riders in the Tour have even stricter laws about that sort of thing.

[Paelos]

I don't think HIPAA prohibits the publishing of failed tests. Otherwise we'd never hear about the ones regarding MLB players, NFL players, etc.

[Ingmar]

They don't publish the actual specific test results/records for those AFAIK, just say that 'person X failed a test for a banned substance'.

[01101010]

I don't think HIPAA prohibits the publishing of failed tests. Otherwise we'd never hear about the ones regarding MLB players, NFL players, etc.

HIPAA prevents everything. You have to jump through flaming hoops to get anything out of that black hole of restriction. That said, we would have to know more about the release of information guidelines/protocols that each league has instituted. Leagues in America as well... riding bicycles quickly is worldwide.

[Paelos]

Then short answer, restrictions legally or not, you're never going to convince me the sport is clean until the process is audited, transparent, applied to all leaders of races, and well-documented. Also, you'll have to remove the stigma of your past leaders coming up guilty.

[Chimpy]

Under HIPPA you cannot even disclose to a third party without consent that a person entered your building, much less what they had done or the specific results.

[ghost]

Then short answer, restrictions legally or not, you're never going to convince me the sport is clean until the process is audited, transparent, applied to all leaders of races, and well-documented. Also, you'll have to remove the stigma of your past leaders coming up guilty.

That's a fucking pipe dream, dude.  It will never happen.

[Tale]

Armstrong too published his test results throughout his comeback.

[Korachia]

An it turns out that Frank Schleck got caught in the doping net - testing positive for xipamide. While only a masking agent, its still banned. So much for the sport being clean haha. This will most definitely also damn Andy Schleck indirectly. 

So who is next? Nibali?

[ghost]

They're all doping.  There's not any way that they aren't all doping.  You're talking about a 10-20% estimated dropoff in performance if you don't dope and in the GC in the TdF there's just no way you could compete.  Did Cadel win last years race clean over a doping Frank and Andy Schleck?  I seriously doubt it.  Is there any way that Wiggins and company are just that much better than a predominantly doping crowd?  I seriously doubt it.  But I don't like getting caught up in all that.  If they test clean I'm going to mentally assume they are clean, or at least at a level with the rest of the crowd. 

[Miasma]

I'm not paying too much attention but there was a pretty good article in the NYT yesterday about his best racing friend.

[Korachia]

They're all doping.  There's not any way that they aren't all doping.  You're talking about a 10-20% estimated dropoff in performance if you don't dope and in the GC in the TdF there's just no way you could compete.  Did Cadel win last years race clean over a doping Frank and Andy Schleck?  I seriously doubt it.  Is there any way that Wiggins and company are just that much better than a predominantly doping crowd?  I seriously doubt it.  But I don't like getting caught up in all that.  If they test clean I'm going to mentally assume they are clean, or at least at a level with the rest of the crowd. 

I on the other hand do care. And say keep the samples of podium riders and/or those that finish top 10, for a long time. Test them every once in a while, and if they show positives slam those bastards as hard as you can. Fines, exclusion from participating in anyway and potentially harder if possible. This culture must be burned down, if bicycle racing is supposed to keep its status as a sport and not as an entertaining drama @ wrestling.

[ghost]

And say keep the samples of podium riders and/or those that finish top 10, for a long time.

That's really the only way it will work if you want to be really testing intensive.  But testing isn't the end-all-be-all.  Clearly there are scores of dudes getting away with it now in the peloton.  I'm also not sure if the fines/exclusion will work, either.  Hell, a 2 year ban is damned near a death sentence.  Look what it did to Ivan Basso's career.  And if you get caught a second time it's 4 years I believe?  Or maybe lifetime?  But people still do it.  I personally think they are fighting a losing battle. 

[Korachia]

But Basso is still riding! He is even thought of as an outsider in Giro di Italia(even won it once in 2010) and many smaller but prestigious races! He should be banned for far far longer. And what about Vino? That bastard should be allowed to sit on a bicycle ever again, or being near other bicyclist.

[Korachia]

And as soon as it start to sink in that you will be ruined financially, prodigiously and sportly if you use doping and get caught, even long after you are out of the business, it will make the riders think a hard time before they do it.

The problem is also those doping-rotten riders that become trainers/managers/ect. especially for young riders. They will most assuredly have a negative impact on their moral.

[ghost]

And as soon as it start to sink in that you will be ruined financially, prodigiously and sportly if you use doping and get caught, even long after you are out of the business, it will make the riders think a hard time before they do it.

This is an assumption that I'm not sure will prove out to be true.  Cycling already has some of the most heavy penalties in sport.  And most of these guys don't make a lot of money anyway, just sitting back in the peloton. 

[UnsGub]

They're all doping.  There's not any way that they aren't all doping.  ...

In the 90s yes.  Today this is not the case.

Gaps are up and they are going slower.  Everyone is still pushing for an edge but much of it is legal expensive type.  Still a few outliners doping in cycling but far less then many other sports.

Next few week will be interesting with the Olympic starting.

[ghost]

In the 90s yes.  Today this is not the case.

Gaps are up and they are going slower.  Everyone is still pushing for an edge but much of it is legal expensive type.  Still a few outliners doping in cycling but far less then many other sports.

I have been watching the time trial today and have watched all the prior dopers (Vinokourov, Basso and Valverde, for example) who used to be top riders and are now middle of the pack riders at best.  I think that, logically, I have to disagree with the idea that doping isn't still widespread.  For a guy to fall that far is pretty much in line with the estimations of a 10-20% increase in production in cycling when you dope.  Additionally, I find it difficult to believe that prior GC contenders are that much worse than all of the current top guys if those other top riders aren't also doping.  You would have to see a serious decrease in the overall times of the peloton for doping to be out, and a slight drop is not indicative of major progress. 

[Simond]

Fuckers should stop asking him about it after reading that.  There's nothing left to say.  And if he does dope he will lose all that stuff. 

He could still be lying dude. All the words in the world don't matter. Tests matter.

So are you asserting that he's cheated at the Olympics as well?

[Paelos]

Troll from more recent material.

[Simond]

Oh, I think you accusing the olympic champion of being a cheat and a liar within the last month counts as recent.
Is calling me a troll your only argument here?

[ghost]

If he cheated at the tour he cheated at the Olympics.  Did he cheat?  Who knows.  You are in the "circumstantial evidence" category just by winning these races.

[lamaros]

In the 90s yes.  Today this is not the case.

Gaps are up and they are going slower.  Everyone is still pushing for an edge but much of it is legal expensive type.  Still a few outliners doping in cycling but far less then many other sports.

I have been watching the time trial today and have watched all the prior dopers (Vinokourov, Basso and Valverde, for example) who used to be top riders and are now middle of the pack riders at best.  I think that, logically, I have to disagree with the idea that doping isn't still widespread.  For a guy to fall that far is pretty much in line with the estimations of a 10-20% increase in production in cycling when you dope.  Additionally, I find it difficult to believe that prior GC contenders are that much worse than all of the current top guys if those other top riders aren't also doping.  You would have to see a serious decrease in the overall times of the peloton for doping to be out, and a slight drop is not indicative of major progress. 

Those guys also just got older.

[Paelos]

Oh, I think you accusing the olympic champion of being a cheat and a liar within the last month counts as recent.
Is calling me a troll your only argument here?

Until the sport cleans itself up and stops dealing with these issues well after the fact, I won't believe anybody. We absolutely should question all the wins.

http://bbcicecream.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/RTR362HI.jpg