Lance Armstrong gives up on fighting USADA charges
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Far'arned Retrogrumpalunkus #63 on
-
The funny thing is that Lance's wins will be taken away from him and given to the next guy in line for each race -who was also a doper.
You'd have to vacate half of the riders to get down to one of them that wasn't doping. Even then, one could never be sure at this point.
That's the ridiculousness of this whole thing. The real doper is the Tour, and professional racing in general.The race itself, and the idiots who put it on and let it get so dirty for so many years, should be vacated -and PERMANENTLY.
So what I'm wondering, is if the various local anti-doping agencies are going to pursue the "new" winners of the Tour de Dope now that Lance's wins have been vacated with the same tenacity that they did old Yellowband? I really doubt it. And that is unconscionable and reprehensible.
The real dopes are the folks who think that this is all over with this "win" against Lance the Doper (one of many, if not most.)
-
Permalink Reply by Noah Weiss 1.2 km on
-
One of many reasons that when I cycle, I am not a racer.
-
Permalink Reply by Lanterne Rouge on
-
If only I cared about professional bicycle racing. I have to agree though; professional sports in general is one big cheat. Too many people are doping.
-
Permalink Reply by Liz on
-
You are correct the foundation does not support research. What it does is support cancer patients.
I have known many people who have found support, guidance and treatment programs through the foundation. It does a great deal of good.
I question the USADA's authority to strip titles. They do not have jurisdiction to investigate the others he was riding against and those cyclists have not had to endure countless investigations and questionings. There is as much evidence that Armstrong doped as their is that any of his racing counterparts doped. Generally speaking most strippings of awards have only occurred when there is physical evidence. Baring any physical evidence, I don't think the agency should have the power to declare someone's victories.
I'm not saying he didn't do it, but honestly no one cares. This is about the dumbest thing our country could waste money and resources on. How about putting this kind of detail investigating people who actually commit crimes.
Rich S said:I'm not entirely sure that it's cancer research that Livestrong supports.
Equally interesting is what the foundation doesn’t do. Most people—including nearly everybody I surveyed while reporting this story—assume that Livestrong funnels large amounts of money into cancer research. Nope. The foundation gave out a total of $20 million in research grants between 1998 and 2005, the year it began phasing out its support of hard science. A note on the foundation’s website informs visitors that, as of 2010, it no longer even accepts research proposals.
I'm not saying the foundation doesn't have a positive impact. It's gotta be rough dealing with cancer so I'm glad they support patients and survivors. However it seems to be a bit of a myth that Livestrong supports cancer reserach.
Overall it seems that only a few of the people who won the Tour de France in recent years have actually won.
Joe TV said:Counterpoint: LA broke the rules in the company of rule breakers and won over and over. He inspired millions around the world, and contributed a ton of money towards cancer research.
-
-
The USADA doesn't vacate the win -I think they can only make him "ineligible" to win -and the other local anti-doping agencies will follow suit. The Tour de Dope will certainly strip Lance's wins and "award" them instead to the Second Doper in line.
IMHO, if Lance is stripped of the titles then they should not go to anyone -vacate the entire decade or more where the Tour de Dope was unable to do its job of ensuring that the race was clean. The entire race is a joke if everyone in the top tiers was doping and by not doping a rider pretty much took himself out of the competition.
Lance doped, all the leaders doped. They all got away with it because they were ahead of the anti-doping tests technologically.
Beyond doping (like everyone else did) Armstrong's main mistake was winning, and in so doing drawing the decades-long attention (witch-hunt) of the US Anti-doping agency -who's only real initial tip-off that Lance was doping was that he couldn't have won without doping.
Does anyone really think the "Second Doper" who is going to pick up the "BIG WIN" in each of Lance's vacated Tour de Dope wins is going to endure a decades-long witch-hunt too? Really???
-DOUBTFUL.
Liz said:I question the USADA's authority to strip titles. They do not have jurisdiction to investigate the others he was riding against and those cyclists have not had to endure countless investigations and questionings. There is as much evidence that Armstrong doped as their is that any of his racing counterparts doped. Generally speaking most strippings of awards have only occurred when there is physical evidence. Baring any physical evidence, I don't think the agency should have the power to declare someone's victories.
-
-
For the most part, the "drug" that Lance was most probably "taking" was his own rested blood from before the race started -if you can call that a "dangerous drug" when you inject yourself with your own donated blood.
Cameron Puetz said:It's not just recently, it's just that the drugs have gotten more helpful and less dangerous. Instead cocaine like in the old days, riders are now taking advanced hormones.
Rich S said:Overall it seems that only a few of the people who won the Tour de France in recent years have actually won.
-
Permalink Reply by spencewine on
-
The idea is to re-inject blood with a higher red blood cell count so that your body can absorb more oxygen. EPO is the hormone that stimulates red blood cell creation, there are synthetic hormones that act as EPO. At the end of the day, it's all about getting oxygen to your muscles so that they recover faster and endure longer.
Cameron Puetz said:It's not just recently, it's just that the drugs have gotten more helpful and less dangerous. Instead cocaine like in the old days, riders are now taking advanced hormones.
Rich S said:Overall it seems that only a few of the people who won the Tour de France in recent years have actually won.
-
-
Actually that was my point. The runner up awarded the title would not be investigated to the point of Armstrong, and therefore the body shouldn't award him the victory.
James BlackHeron said:Does anyone really think the "Second Doper" who is going to pick up the "BIG WIN" in each of Lance's vacated Tour de Dope wins is going to endure a decades-long witch-hunt too? Really???
-DOUBTFUL.
Liz said:I question the USADA's authority to strip titles. They do not have jurisdiction to investigate the others he was riding against and those cyclists have not had to endure countless investigations and questionings. There is as much evidence that Armstrong doped as their is that any of his racing counterparts doped. Generally speaking most strippings of awards have only occurred when there is physical evidence. Baring any physical evidence, I don't think the agency should have the power to declare someone's victories.
-
-
And even if they did, the third-place guy wouldn't be investigated, or the fourth-place.
It's a Pandora's box they are opening up. If they didn't catch him at the time or right after then it's too late IMHO. He played the game by their rules and won. If they can't pin a case on him within a year of the win. then it should just be dropped.
Going back 10 years is ridiculous.
Liz said:
Actually that was my point. The runner up awarded the title would not be investigated to the point of Armstrong, and therefore the body shouldn't award him the victory.
-
-
Does this mean that all 500 tests with negative results are invalid? That he is dirty even if he does not test that way? If so, how do we know anyone is clean or dirty?
-
Permalink Reply by Michael J Blane on
-
+1
well stated.
James BlackHeron said:The funny thing is that Lance's wins will be taken away from him and given to the next guy in line for each race -who was also a doper.
You'd have to vacate half of the riders to get down to one of them that wasn't doping. Even then, one could never be sure at this point.
That's the ridiculousness of this whole thing. The real doper is the Tour, and professional racing in general.The race itself, and the idiots who put it on and let it get so dirty for so many years, should be vacated -and PERMANENTLY.
So what I'm wondering, is if the various local anti-doping agencies are going to pursue the "new" winners of the Tour de Dope now that Lance's wins have been vacated with the same tenacity that they did old Yellowband? I really doubt it. And that is unconscionable and reprehensible.
The real dopes are the folks who think that this is all over with this "win" against Lance the Doper (one of many, if not most.)
-
-
Obviously, the Tour de France isn't won on the racecourse by the riders. The UCI and WADA decide the outcome. If I were one of these riders, I'd skip the podium and refuse to claim victory until told I'm the winner by UCI and WADA. I'm concerned that the governing bodies have gotten into the business of choosing winners and losers rather than having victory decided on the field of play. When they choose who wins or who loses, they tend to destroy the incentive to compete.
Groups
-
Chicagoland Beer Explora…
203 members
-
Wednesday Night for Mort…
1 member
-
Great Lakes Ultra Cycling
270 members
-
Major Taylor Internation…
1 member
-
Critical Mass discussion
261 members
© 2008-2016 The Chainlink Community, L.L.C.
Powered by
