Lance Armstrong's legacy tainted for life

[bonarae]

http://www.cbssports.com/general/story/19887362/usada-to-ban-armstrong-for-life-strip-tour-titles

Ugh. What has gone wrong in the sporting world ever since PEDs were first introduced? xsmhx I believe no men's sport will ever be spared from this type of scandal...

[Go Lehigh TU Owl]

I'm of the belief that he lost a nut so anything he needed to take to be more "manly" is fine by me.

[blackfordpu]

Tainted? No. Nothing has been proven. It just seems that he is tired of the fight and he has decided that it is not worth any more of his time.

The good that he has done in the world can not be undone.

[OhioHen]

The whole process of going after someone who is RETIRED just makes USADA look like a bunch of buffoons.

What's gained if they ban Armstrong now? He isn't competing anyway.

[AshevilleApp2]

Cycling is tainted all the way through.

[Cocky]

How many tour titles are now vacanted?
Has any participant not doped in the last ten to twenty years?
The big loser is the tour because I watched a decade for no reason. My interest in that event is slipping away.

[ASUMountaineer]

I'm of the belief that he lost a nut so anything he needed to take to be more "manly" is fine by me.

Never thought of it that way, but you speak the truth.

[TheRevSFA]

Good news is: since he was suspended for life, he now meets the requirements to transfer to Lamar U to play football

[Laker]

How many tour titles are now vacanted?
Has any participant not doped in the last ten to twenty years?
The big loser is the tour because I watched a decade for no reason. My interest in that event is slipping away.

They just showed the graphic on the top three finishers over the years. Almost all of them were tainted. They can just drop the sport.

I do have a question about how Armstrong can be penalized so many years later when he never failed one test. The governing body is a bunch of incompetent buffoons.

[MSUDuo]

They just showed the graphic on the top three finishers over the years. Almost all of them were tainted. They can just drop the sport.

I do have a question about how Armstrong can be penalized so many years later when he never failed one test. The governing body is a bunch of incompetent buffoons.

Not tainted in my book for that sole reason. He would have been tested more than anyone after winning his 2nd title

[Skjellyfetti]

Cycling is tainted all the way through.

Exactly.

[FormerPokeCenter]

Lance Armstrong's legacy is far from tainted....Travis Tygart is a douchebag, plain and simple...In a tacit admission that he couldn't compete on an even-playing field with Armstrong based on the due process rules guaranteed by the constitution, he lowered the standard necessary in order to get a "conviction." It's as though he blood-doped his way to a win...

This isn't really about cycling or Lance Armstrong. It's about Tygart's vainglorious need to make a name for himself by taking somebody down. Great. Now what? He's still got to wake up every morning being Travis Tygart, Douchebag Extraordinaire. I just heard that moron Colin Cowherd pontificate about the dirty and corrupt nature of cycling and he compared Lance to Usain Bolt. He indicated that since they BOTH destroyed the competition, most of whom had doped, then it was obvious that they've both doped....

I don't think I've ever heard commentary that so egregiously and thoroughly misunderstood the subject matter being opined about. And, considering I've been on this board for 7 years, that's saying something!

Usain Bolt is 6'7, whereas the average world class sprinter is between 5'9 and 6'0." Assuming identical strength and fast twitch muscle fiber firing speed, that gives Usain Bolt and incredible advantage based on stride length alone.....That's simple physics....

Lance Armstrong had perhaps the highest VO2 max recording ever, when he was 17 years old...he's relatively small, strong and has a freakishly high ability to metabolize oxygen. If you've ever ridden a bike up a hill, you'll instantly understand why this is significant in a sport like cycling. Again, it's simple physics....

And, simple physics explains Travis Tygart's singlemindedness with bringing Lance Armstrong down. His ego and notariety seeking outweigh any other fair-minded consideration. It was a freaking kangaroo court and I won't waste the space to detail all the reasons why it should be ignored by any rational person....The USADA doesn't oversee the Tour or international cycling. It can't ban Armstrong nor strip him of titles that it doesn't administer.

**** Travis Tygart....and the ego he rode in on....

[49RFootballNow]

Quick, name all the famous cyclists you know:

1. Lance Armstrong
2. ................
3. ................

This was a silly move on USADA's part and does more harm to their sport than good.

[CID1990]

Cycling is tainted all the way through.

Cycling is also hard on the taint.

[ngineer]

I think Armstrong overcame so much, he's only lost in the eyes of the pointy headed bureaucrats. Bunch of idiots.

[TheRevSFA]

Quick, name all the famous cyclists you know:

1. Lance Armstrong
2. ................
3. ................

This was a silly move on USADA's part and does more harm to their sport than good.

Peewee Herman

The kid from ET

[Mr. C]

Greg LeMond was winning the Tour de France long before Lance Armstrong. In Europe, cyclists are like rock stars.

[Mr. C]

I think Armstrong overcame so much, he's only lost in the eyes of the pointy headed bureaucrats. Bunch of idiots.

Armstrong has been a farce and a cheat for years. I've covered U.S. cycling since Armstrong was a member of the junior national team and I've had the chance to cover his career when he competed in the Tour du Pont. Back when he was in his teens, another member of the U.S. Junior National Team who I had befriended told me stories about Lance. He is a bully and has done everything he can for years to hide his illicit behavior. Even the thing about "never failing a drug test" needs to be evaluated under the right microscope. I can't remember the source, Men's Journal or something like that, that did an excellent article last year on the truth of the testing. If I commit a murder and someone witnesses it, they testify in a court of law and I'm convicted. There are plenty of teammates and others who have shared evidence of his doping for years. People need to wake up and quit being naive about guys like Armstrong, Barry Bonds, Roger Clemens and others.

[ngineer]

I have to see evidence. And I've seen none. All of the testing he's been through in the past...and,now, after he's retired they decided to do this? Easy to accuse and motives need to be explored. In todays 'wired world' too much speculation and second hand stories travel like the speed of light.

[FormerPokeCenter]

Armstrong has been a farce and a cheat for years. I've covered U.S. cycling since Armstrong was a member of the junior national team and I've had the chance to cover his career when he competed in the Tour de France. Back when he was in his teens, another member of the U.S. Junior National Team who I had befriended told me stories about Lance. He is a bully and has done everything he can for years to hide his illicit behavior. Even the thing about "never failing a drug test" needs to be evaluated under the right microscope. I can't remember the source, Men's Journal or something like that, that did an excellent article last year on the truth of the testing. If I commit a murder and someone witnesses it, they testify in a court of law and I'm convicted. There are plenty of teammates and others who have shared evidence of his doping for years. People need to wake up and quit being naive about guys like Armstrong, Barry Bonds, Roger Clemens and others.


What we know to be true is that douchebag Travis Tygart exchanged immunity with cyclists who HAD tested positive and extracted testimony about Armstrong. In essence, the guys who DID cheat, got amnesty and the ability to keep riding without sanction, while Armstrong, who's NEVER tested positive receives a lifetime ban....

C'mon....even if you hate Armstrong, surely you can see the injustice in that....

Moreover, Tygart overreached on several points. In doing so, he violated the USADA's own rules, reaching back 17 years to bring up an allegation when his charter only says he's got an 8 year window. That's basically creating ex post facto low....We don't do that in this country....our government agencies are required to afford due process to citizens..

There's nothing and I repeat NOTHING about the USADA's procedure in this matter that follows due process.

I get that you don't like Armstrong. That's your prerogative. But, unless you're a moron - which I doubt - there's no way you can objectively evaluate this farce of a Kangaroo Court as being fair. The only way it's fair is through the lens of that Douchebag Travis Tygart who is at once and the same time the prosecutor, judge and jury...

How the **** is that fair??

[Cocky]

Will Greg Lemond's tour victories be taken away?
What about the others who passed their drug test?
I have no idea if he juiced or not but why even give the test if you dont believe them? Save the money

[OhioHen]

More to the point:

Will USADA go after all the NFL players using HGH? Suddenly we would be back to a 220 pounder being the biggest player on the roster instead of being considered an undersized linebacker.

Will the USADA go after all the foreign nationals in MLB (in the US on work visas) for BREAKING THE LAW by taking performance enhancing drugs? Goodbye to most of the league speaking broken English, because they'd all be deported and never allowed to work in the US again.

The answer - NO, because those sports have money to throw around and buy their immunity.

[Mr. C]

What we know to be true is that douchebag Travis Tygart exchanged immunity with cyclists who HAD tested positive and extracted testimony about Armstrong. In essence, the guys who DID cheat, got amnesty and the ability to keep riding without sanction, while Armstrong, who's NEVER tested positive receives a lifetime ban....

C'mon....even if you hate Armstrong, surely you can see the injustice in that....

Moreover, Tygart overreached on several points. In doing so, he violated the USADA's own rules, reaching back 17 years to bring up an allegation when his charter only says he's got an 8 year window. That's basically creating ex post facto low....We don't do that in this country....our government agencies are required to afford due process to citizens..

There's nothing and I repeat NOTHING about the USADA's procedure in this matter that follows due process.

I get that you don't like Armstrong. That's your prerogative. But, unless you're a moron - which I doubt - there's no way you can objectively evaluate this farce of a Kangaroo Court as being fair. The only way it's fair is through the lens of that Douchebag Travis Tygart who is at once and the same time the prosecutor, judge and jury...

How the **** is that fair??

If this process was unfair and unjust, why did the courts throw out Armstrong's law suit?

[Mr. C]

More to the point:

Will USADA go after all the NFL players using HGH? Suddenly we would be back to a 220 pounder being the biggest player on the roster instead of being considered an undersized linebacker.

Will the USADA go after all the foreign nationals in MLB (in the US on work visas) for BREAKING THE LAW by taking performance enhancing drugs? Goodbye to most of the league speaking broken English, because they'd all be deported and never allowed to work in the US again.

The answer - NO, because those sports have money to throw around and buy their immunity.

Because that is not the jurisdiction of the USADA. The USADA handles Olympic sports, primarily. It has nothing to do with the NFL, MLB, or any other major sports in the U.S.

[FormerPokeCenter]

LOL, please tell me that you actually READ the judge's decision? Apparently not...

There an infinite number of reasons why a judge might dismiss a lawsuit. In this case, the judge opined that there was the appearance of a conflict with the USADA's handling, but since International Cycling is subject to international arbitration, the judge ruled that it was his belief that there were other remedies for an international case rather than a federal judge's opinion, since the issues at play would be outside his normal areas of purview.

That's not the same as throwing his case out because it has no merit...

While I respect your coverage of football, color me unimpressed with your grasp of legal poiints and the issues at play with Armstrong's case...

At this juncture, what Armstrong did or didn't do is irrelevant. A United States agency, whose funding has been questioned, found a high profile case to take, to the exclusion of all other cases and is acting as judge, jury and prosecutor, without regard for due process. Even the federal judge who dismissed the case admitted there appeared to be a conflict of interest there....

Coming on the heels of a US Department of Justice investigation that couldn't find cause to bring charges, the questionable methods and overreaching agenda of the USADA should be cause for concern for pretty much everybody interested in fairness in this country.

The Government shouldn't be able to do what a government agency just did to Armstrong without actually having to prove something in a fair forum observing Armstrong's due process rights.

If people who get paid to report on issues like this don't understand what they're reporting on, what chance does the average joe on the street have to get a good feel for the issues..

IMHO, there's a pretty significant tragedy in all this, even leaving Armstrong out of the picture. This case underscores how profoundly the media fails in even understanding how to properly do its job....

[NoDak 4 Ever]

LOL, please tell me that you actually READ the judge's decision? Apparently not...

There an infinite number of reasons why a judge might dismiss a lawsuit. In this case, the judge opined that there was the appearance of a conflict with the USADA's handling, but since International Cycling is subject to international arbitration, the judge ruled that it was his belief that there were other remedies for an international case rather than a federal judge's opinion, since the issues at play would be outside his normal areas of purview.

That's not the same as throwing his case out because it has no merit...

While I respect your coverage of football, color me unimpressed with your grasp of legal poiints and the issues at play with Armstrong's case...

At this juncture, what Armstrong did or didn't do is irrelevant. A United States agency, whose funding has been questioned, found a high profile case to take, to the exclusion of all other cases and is acting as judge, jury and prosecutor, without regard for due process. Even the federal judge who dismissed the case admitted there appeared to be a conflict of interest there....

Coming on the heels of a US Department of Justice investigation that couldn't find cause to bring charges, the questionable methods and overreaching agenda of the USADA should be cause for concern for pretty much everybody interested in fairness in this country.

The Government shouldn't be able to do what a government agency just did to Armstrong without actually having to prove something in a fair forum observing Armstrong's due process rights.

If people who get paid to report on issues like this don't understand what they're reporting on, what chance does the average joe on the street have to get a good feel for the issues..

IMHO, there's a pretty significant tragedy in all this, even leaving Armstrong out of the picture. This case underscores how profoundly the media fails in even understanding how to properly do its job....

You are mostly correct. I must, however, correct your characterization of the USADA as a government agency. It is, in fact, a non-governmental agency. It was created by the USOC and not the government. No government agency has chosen to enter into the fray, hence the above mentioned court decision.

It's a railroad job to be sure with what seems to be an all-powerful, unaccountable organization at the center.

[dgtw]

I'm of the belief that he lost a nut so anything he needed to take to be more "manly" is fine by me.

Having been through testicular cancer and chemo, I can tell you riding a unicycle does not decrease one's sex drive.

[FormerPokeCenter]

You are mostly correct. I must, however, correct your characterization of the USADA as a government agency. It is, in fact, a non-governmental agency. It was created by the USOC and not the government. No government agency has chosen to enter into the fray, hence the above mentioned court decision.

It's a railroad job to be sure with what seems to be an all-powerful, unaccountable organization at the center.

It's tax-payer funded. As far as I'm concerned, that gives it the imprimatur of the US Government. If they were truly private, the due process issue would be moot. The fact that we, the people, fund that charade is what pissss me off....

[FormerPokeCenter]

Because that is not the jurisdiction of the USADA. The USADA handles Olympic sports, primarily. It has nothing to do with the NFL, MLB, or any other major sports in the U.S.

So the Tour de France is an Olympic Sport????

[Mr. C]

So the Tour de France is an Olympic Sport????

No, but cycling is a major Olympic sport. Quit nitpicking. You have to be pretty naive to think that guys like Bonds, Clemens and Armstrong were not drug cheats. I guess you didn't hear Victor Conte's recent comments about how easy it is to pass drug tests.

[Mr. C]

LOL, please tell me that you actually READ the judge's decision? Apparently not...

There an infinite number of reasons why a judge might dismiss a lawsuit. In this case, the judge opined that there was the appearance of a conflict with the USADA's handling, but since International Cycling is subject to international arbitration, the judge ruled that it was his belief that there were other remedies for an international case rather than a federal judge's opinion, since the issues at play would be outside his normal areas of purview.

That's not the same as throwing his case out because it has no merit...

While I respect your coverage of football, color me unimpressed with your grasp of legal poiints and the issues at play with Armstrong's case...

At this juncture, what Armstrong did or didn't do is irrelevant. A United States agency, whose funding has been questioned, found a high profile case to take, to the exclusion of all other cases and is acting as judge, jury and prosecutor, without regard for due process. Even the federal judge who dismissed the case admitted there appeared to be a conflict of interest there....

Coming on the heels of a US Department of Justice investigation that couldn't find cause to bring charges, the questionable methods and overreaching agenda of the USADA should be cause for concern for pretty much everybody interested in fairness in this country.

The Government shouldn't be able to do what a government agency just did to Armstrong without actually having to prove something in a fair forum observing Armstrong's due process rights.

If people who get paid to report on issues like this don't understand what they're reporting on, what chance does the average joe on the street have to get a good feel for the issues..

IMHO, there's a pretty significant tragedy in all this, even leaving Armstrong out of the picture. This case underscores how profoundly the media fails in even understanding how to properly do its job....

I haven't seen your grasp of legal points, or those of any of the other Armstrong apologists to be very compelling. Have you ever studied any law?

[FormerPokeCenter]

No, but cycling is a major Olympic sport. Quit nitpicking. You have to be pretty naive to think that guys like Bonds, Clemens and Armstrong were not drug cheats. I guess you didn't hear Victor Conte's recent comments about how easy it is to pass drug tests.

LOL, it's not nitpicking to point out that the USADA has overstepped in a number of places, including their attempt to strip Armstrong of titles in events not under their purview. It speaks exactly to what's wrong with Travis Lie-gart's methods and tactics in going after Armstrong...Thanks for the chuckle with regard to the notion that the truth is a pesky inconvenience! ;)

While it may be helpful, given your stated dislike for Armstrong, to lump him in with other athletes and paint with a wide brush to make the argument you're apparently married to, all that does is make you look like that moron, Colin Cowherd; who - on Friday - likened Armstrong to Usain Bolt and said that because they both beaten guys who've used, they - too - must be using.

It demonstrates a stunning lack of understanding about the subject matter. Since you like to muddy the waters by pointing to athletes other than Armstrong in a conversation ABOUT Armstrong, let's examine Bolt for just a second. He's 6'7 where the average sprinter is 5'9-6'0....There are two things and two things only that determine a sprint race. Stride length and turn-over speed. So, all things being equal, like fast-twitch muscle fiber strength and firing speed, Bolt's going to win handily against shorter athletes because of his stride length. That his convincing victories have come against athletes who dope can be taken as some sort of indication that he, too, HAS to have doped is simply a staggering display of stupidity...but that didn't stop Cowherd from voicing it...

Your argument against Armstrong is dangerously close to the same fallacy that Cowherd employs...

We could break down what is necessary for a cyclist to compete and perform at a high level and Armstrong DEMONSTRABLY has a natural genetic advantage when it comes to cycling, though it's a lot more subtle than an incredibly long strike length....His VO2 max levels were among the highest ever recorded when he was 17. If you have among the highest levels of oxygen transfer efficiency in the world at age 17, it doesn't come as ANY shock that you'd do well at a grueling test of endurance like the Tour de France...If you're as familiar with cycling as you suggest, then you understand the logic at work here....

If you don't understand the logic at work, then I believe your understanding of cycling isn't as thorough as you believe it to be...

How much time have you spent in the saddle???

[FormerPokeCenter]

I haven't seen your grasp of legal points, or those of any of the other Armstrong apologists to be very compelling. Have you ever studied any law?

I must have missed the memo where you were given powers of sole arbitrage to decide what was relevant with regard to the legal analysis of why the judge dismissed the case and what it said about the veracity of USADA's claims....

Your legal opinion on this matter seems to be identical to those who said that OJ Simpson's innocence was conclusively proven by his acquittal. It's funny that you seem to think a dismissal, for the Judge's stated reason, speaks to the legitimacy of the USADA's case in any way...

It's obvious that one of us is pretty naive here, counselor, and it's not me ;)

[Mr. C]

I must have missed the memo where you were given powers of sole arbitrage to decide what was relevant with regard to the legal analysis of why the judge dismissed the case and what it said about the veracity of USADA's claims....

Your legal opinion on this matter seems to be identical to those who said that OJ Simpson's innocence was conclusively proven by his acquittal. It's funny that you seem to think a dismissal, for the Judge's stated reason, speaks to the legitimacy of the USADA's case in any way...

It's obvious that one of us is pretty naive here, counselor, and it's not me ;)

It is clear you are an Armstrong apologist and no evidence would change your view, just like the folks who thought Barry Bonds and Roger Clemens were innocent. There were 11 people ready to testify against Armstrong.

What an idiotic argument to bring O.J. Simpson into this. My opinion on O.J. Simpson is that he is a double murderer and anyone who had any understanding of DNA evidence should have known that. I don't know how O.J. Simpson has ANYTHING to do with Lance Armstrong. Just keep believing that poor, old Lance never took anything, or cheated. Go ahead and bury your head in the sand like so many others are doing.

[Mr. C]

LOL, it's not nitpicking to point out that the USADA has overstepped in a number of places, including their attempt to strip Armstrong of titles in events not under their purview. It speaks exactly to what's wrong with Travis Lie-gart's methods and tactics in going after Armstrong...Thanks for the chuckle with regard to the notion that the truth is a pesky inconvenience! ;)

While it may be helpful, given your stated dislike for Armstrong, to lump him in with other athletes and paint with a wide brush to make the argument you're apparently married to, all that does is make you look like that moron, Colin Cowherd; who - on Friday - likened Armstrong to Usain Bolt and said that because they both beaten guys who've used, they - too - must be using.

It demonstrates a stunning lack of understanding about the subject matter. Since you like to muddy the waters by pointing to athletes other than Armstrong in a conversation ABOUT Armstrong, let's examine Bolt for just a second. He's 6'7 where the average sprinter is 5'9-6'0....There are two things and two things only that determine a sprint race. Stride length and turn-over speed. So, all things being equal, like fast-twitch muscle fiber strength and firing speed, Bolt's going to win handily against shorter athletes because of his stride length. That his convincing victories have come against athletes who dope can be taken as some sort of indication that he, too, HAS to have doped is simply a staggering display of stupidity...but that didn't stop Cowherd from voicing it...

Your argument against Armstrong is dangerously close to the same fallacy that Cowherd employs...

We could break down what is necessary for a cyclist to compete and perform at a high level and Armstrong DEMONSTRABLY has a natural genetic advantage when it comes to cycling, though it's a lot more subtle than an incredibly long strike length....His VO2 max levels were among the highest ever recorded when he was 17. If you have among the highest levels of oxygen transfer efficiency in the world at age 17, it doesn't come as ANY shock that you'd do well at a grueling test of endurance like the Tour de France...If you're as familiar with cycling as you suggest, then you understand the logic at work here....

If you don't understand the logic at work, then I believe your understanding of cycling isn't as thorough as you believe it to be...

How much time have you spent in the saddle???

And Barry Bonds had a genetic advantage to play baseball and was one of the best in world at it BEFORE he started cheating. I know Marion Jones personally, I covered her when she was in high school and knew she was one of the most incredible athletes I had ever seen. She did Michael Jordan-type stuff when she was a young basketball player and she had the talent to be one of the all-time greats in track and field. The girl is 6-foot-1 and had all sorts of genetic advantages. One of the saddest things I've ever seen is that this talented, young lady, who didn't need to cheat, got mixed up with the wrong crowd and decided to use shortcuts to her success. She has paid an awfully high price for it. Just because Armstrong has the natural talent he has doesn't mean he didn't cheat.

[FormerPokeCenter]

And Barry Bonds had a genetic advantage to play baseball and was one of the best in world at it BEFORE he started cheating. I know Marion Jones personally, I covered her when she was in high school and knew she was one of the most incredible athletes I had ever seen. She did Michael Jordan-type stuff when she was a young basketball player and she had the talent to be one of the all-time greats in track and field. The girl is 6-foot-1 and had all sorts of genetic advantages. One of the saddest things I've ever seen is that this talented, young lady, who didn't need to cheat, got mixed up with the wrong crowd and decided to use shortcuts to her success. She has paid an awfully high price for it. Just because Armstrong has the natural talent he has doesn't mean he didn't cheat.

Wow...so now you're advocating that one must prove innocence? Holy Recto-Cranial Inversion, Batman!

If somebody showed me EVIDENCE. Hard Evidence that he cheated, fine...but that's not what Travis Lie-gart has....he's got testimony he extracted in exchange for granting immunity to riders who've tested positive. They continue to ride and compete, despite testing positive, yet he's "banned" Armstrong for life.

Again, I understand that you don't like Armstrong, You've made that fact abundantly clear and it's obvious that NO lack of evidence is going to dissuade you from your pre-conceived notion. ;)

[Skjellyfetti]

If they awarded the 2005 Tour de France to the highest finishing cyclist that's never been linked to PED's... they'd have to give it to 23rd place Jan Ullrich.

[Mr. C]

Wow...so now you're advocating that one must prove innocence? Holy Recto-Cranial Inversion, Batman!

If somebody showed me EVIDENCE. Hard Evidence that he cheated, fine...but that's not what Travis Lie-gart has....he's got testimony he extracted in exchange for granting immunity to riders who've tested positive. They continue to ride and compete, despite testing positive, yet he's "banned" Armstrong for life.

Again, I understand that you don't like Armstrong, You've made that fact abundantly clear and it's obvious that NO lack of evidence is going to dissuade you from your pre-conceived notion. ;)

So do you still think there is no "hard evidence" that Lance Armstrong didn't cheat?

[TheDancinMonarch]

If they awarded the 2005 Tour de France to the highest finishing cyclist that's never been linked to PED's... they'd have to give it to 23rd place Jan Ullrich.

You might want to rethink that.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/10/sports/cycling/court-finds-cyclist-jan-ullrich-guilty-of-blood-doping.html?_r=0

[Cocky]

At least the races were fair, everybody was juiced?

[dgtw]

Now that he's going on Oprah and admitting he doped, can we put the matter to bed?

[citdog]

Taint




http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m1agaZinJHg

[TheRevSFA]

He's got ball

[FormerPokeCenter]

I still want to hear what he's got to say....

And, nothing that he DOES say is going to change the fact that the USADA overreached, overstepped and didn't follow it's own rules...

Additionally, nothing he DOES say is going to change the fact that he, personally, elevated cycling in this country to a level it never even dreamed of before...

AND, most importantly, nothing he DOES say is going to change the fact that he literally changed the face of cancer survivorship from one with a bleak outlook, to one where it's possible to conceive of a vibrant, THRIVING life after one's been diagnosed with cancer.

Those two things, alone, are immeasurable. On balance, the good he's done FAR outweighs any negatives.

[asumike83]

He survived cancer, raised billions of dollars for research and inspired many people. To be honest, I could care less that he did the same thing as everyone else in the sport. The years of lying, vehement denial and accusing others of being on a witch hunt is all that bothers me but I'm not going to crucify him for it.

[dgtw]

I still want to hear what he's got to say....

And, nothing that he DOES say is going to change the fact that the USADA overreached, overstepped and didn't follow it's own rules...

He still cheated.


Additionally, nothing he DOES say is going to change the fact that he, personally, elevated cycling in this country to a level it never even dreamed of before...


He took a sport nobody cared about and turned it into a sport where everyone thinks everybody cheats.

AND, most importantly, nothing he DOES say is going to change the fact that he literally changed the face of cancer survivorship from one with a bleak outlook, to one where it's possible to conceive of a vibrant, THRIVING life after one's been diagnosed with cancer.

Those two things, alone, are immeasurable. On balance, the good he's done FAR outweighs any negatives.

I don't think people viewed cancer as a total death sentence before he got sick. I was diagnosed with the same cancer he had five years ago. I greatly appreciate what he did to raise awareness and money to fight the disease. In some ways I may owe him my life. But a man who was held up to be a hero to many people let a lot of people down.

[FormerPokeCenter]

He still cheated.


He took a sport nobody cared about and turned it into a sport where everyone thinks everybody cheats.

I don't think people viewed cancer as a total death sentence before he got sick. I was diagnosed with the same cancer he had five years ago. I greatly appreciate what he did to raise awareness and money to fight the disease. In some ways I may owe him my life. But a man who was held up to be a hero to many people let a lot of people down.

The problem with Lance is we all thought he was super human. And, in a sense, he was and is. The reality is that he's frought with human frailities like most of us.

Cycling had more than its fair share of taint before Lance Armstrong ever stepped foot on the scene. They were testing for banned subtances long before he ever thought about riding in the Tour.

While cancer may not have been viewed as a death sentence, and I'm glad you're a survivor, by the way, but can you name somebody...anybody, actually.....who embodies the concept of "Thriving Survivorship" more than Armstrong has?

Nobody that I know who rides is now suddenly going to stop riding or view the fantastic benefits of cycling through a pejorative light because of Armstrong. He elevated the sport in ways it never even dreamed about....

Yeah...I know....I'm an apologist. Sue me ;)

[I Bleed Purple]

The problem with Lance is we all thought he was super human. And, in a sense, he was and is. The reality is that he's frought with human frailities like most of us.

Cycling had more than its fair share of taint before Lance Armstrong ever stepped foot on the scene. They were testing for banned subtances long before he ever thought about riding in the Tour.

While cancer may not have been viewed as a death sentence, and I'm glad you're a survivor, by the way, but can you name somebody...anybody, actually.....who embodies the concept of "Thriving Survivorship" more than Armstrong has?

Nobody that I know who rides is now suddenly going to stop riding or view the fantastic benefits of cycling through a pejorative light because of Armstrong. He elevated the sport in ways it never even dreamed about....

Yeah...I know....I'm an apologist. Sue me ;)

Did Lance sue you? Don't ask him, he can't remember all the people he sued to cover his deception.

[TheRevSFA]

He still cheated.


He took a sport nobody cared about and turned it into a sport where everyone thinks everybody cheats.

I don't think people viewed cancer as a total death sentence before he got sick. I was diagnosed with the same cancer he had five years ago. I greatly appreciate what he did to raise awareness and money to fight the disease. In some ways I may owe him my life. But a man who was held up to be a hero to many people let a lot of people down.

From 1900 to the time that Contador was suspended, cycling has been a dirty and corrupt sport. They are making changes to fix that now, but don't get the impression that Lance came in and tainted the sport. He put the sport on another level because everyone likes a comeback story. He also took cancer fundraising to another level with livestrong.

In terms of PEDs, the people who got screwed were the ones who didn't take PEDs, but it's too bad they didn't make the cut to race. In other words, PEDs run rampant.

Also, the International cycling federation is dirty and corrupt, and I mean worse than FIFA

[FormerPokeCenter]

Eddie Mercx, widely regarded as the best cyclist, EVER...was busted for using illegal subtances three times in the same SEASON...

Nobody ever banned him for life, stripped him of titles nor persecuted him. He enjoys a favorable reputation amongst the Tour faithful and cycling fans in general...

[FormerPokeCenter]

Did Lance sue you? Don't ask him, he can't remember all the people he sued to cover his deception.

The thing about libel and slander is that if you're accusing me of using subtance A, but I'm really using Substance B, you're wrong and you're lying. The truth is an absolute defense and if you have your day in court and can't produce the truth, then...you're screwed.

Newspapers, particularly, have to worry about this when they print allegations. Sometimes they may be correct that somebody's dirty, but if they don't get the context and the facts correct, or if they rush to print something without fully investigating it, they can be sued if they diplay a reckless disregard for the truth or falsity of an issue they report. In other words, even if it later turns out that they were fortuitously right about something, if they publish before it's nailed down, their story could be actionable....

I think some of the folks who got sued by Armstrong fall into that category. He KNOWS he's using Substance B and has never used Substance A. They accuse him of using Substance A, so he sues them, knowing they can't prove their case...

In that scenario, yes, he's a cheat. But the other person's a liar. Whatcha gonna do???

[I Bleed Purple]

The thing about libel and slander is that if you're accusing me of using subtance A, but I'm really using Substance B, you're wrong and you're lying. The truth is an absolute defense and if you have your day in court and can't produce the truth, then...you're screwed.

Newspapers, particularly, have to worry about this when they print allegations. Sometimes they may be correct that somebody's dirty, but if they don't get the context and the facts correct, or if they rush to print something without fully investigating it, they can be sued if they diplay a reckless disregard for the truth or falsity of an issue they report. In other words, even if it later turns out that they were fortuitously right about something, if they publish before it's nailed down, their story could be actionable....

I think some of the folks who got sued by Armstrong fall into that category. He KNOWS he's using Substance B and has never used Substance A. They accuse him of using Substance A, so he sues them, knowing they can't prove their case...

In that scenario, yes, he's a cheat. But the other person's a liar. Whatcha gonna do???

Of course you'd believe that with no actual evidence to back up that belief because you have faith that Armstrong isn't the person that hounds people and threatens to bury them into oblivion like the reports of what he did to the Andreus. He threatened to tap phones, have people follow anybody who would even question Lance's involvement in doping. It has NOTHING to do with what particular substance he took. Armstrong made up stuff about Greg Lamond just to try to discredit him. There are a LOT of people that were close to Armstrong that absolutely hate him because of the person Lance Armstrong is. The only legitimate argument in his favor is "the ends justify the means" for Livestrong, which pales to all the arguments against him. Destroying people's livelihoods in the name of making Cycling popular in the US is a poor argument in his favor.

[FormerPokeCenter]

That's awfully paranoid. What's he going to do, hire an army of private investigators? To do what? Follow people? Big deal...tapping phones?

You'd have to find somebody willing to engage in breaking and entering and who had expertise in tappig phones. First, that's expensive...Second, no reputable company does that. The myth that PIs are some sort of super secret agents you can hire at the drop of a hat is just that..a myth...

As to leMond, don't forget that he fired the first salvo at Armstrong...

Moreover, LeMond is a chronic whiner. He whined about his father's inability to run his bicylce company when it crashed and burned. Then, when Trek threw him a lifeline, he would bit the hand that fed him when he started accusing Armstrong of doping. Trek suggested that he might want to keep his coments about doping in general, rather than make specific allegations against Trek (and by extension, LeMond's) best product pitchman.

Several years later, Trek would sever the relationship and LeMond would whine that after paying him millions of dollars, Trek failed to properly promote his bikes. In six years, he only sold $10k worth of bikes in France....

It's ALWAYS somebody else's fault....

But I digress. Armstrong is the author of his own misfortune. He chose to dope. That's on him.,

But, there's NO escaping the fact that he elevated cycling and survivorship...none.

Oh yeah....there's also the matter of more than half a billion dollars raised for the fight against cancer....

[I Bleed Purple]

That's awfully paranoid. What's he going to do, hire an army of private investigators? To do what? Follow people? Big deal...tapping phones?

You'd have to find somebody willing to engage in breaking and entering and who had expertise in tappig phones. First, that's expensive...Second, no reputable company does that. The myth that PIs are some sort of super secret agents you can hire at the drop of a hat is just that..a myth...

As to leMond, don't forget that he fired the first salvo at Armstrong...

Moreover, LeMond is a chronic whiner. He whined about his father's inability to run his bicylce company when it crashed and burned. Then, when Trek threw him a lifeline, he would bit the hand that fed him when he started accusing Armstrong of doping. Trek suggested that he might want to keep his coments about doping in general, rather than make specific allegations against Trek (and by extension, LeMond's) best product pitchman.

Several years later, Trek would sever the relationship and LeMond would whine that after paying him millions of dollars, Trek failed to properly promote his bikes. In six years, he only sold $10k worth of bikes in France....

It's ALWAYS somebody else's fault....

But I digress. Armstrong is the author of his own misfortune. He chose to dope. That's on him.,

But, there's NO escaping the fact that he elevated cycling and survivorship...none.

Oh yeah....there's also the matter of more than half a billion dollars raised for the fight against cancer....

And Lemond was right...

[dgtw]

I did read his book after my diagnosis and it did give me a positive outlook going through chemo. Though I got it at the library, so he didn't get any royalties from me.

Yes, cycling has always been dirty, but I think he is a victim of his own success. If he had won a couple Tours and then slipped back into the pack, he'd have enjoyed his 15 minutes and then people would have forgotten about him. But to win seven put him under the microscope.

[FormerPokeCenter]

And Lemond was right...

Lemond had no direct knowledge. He surmised that Armstrong was guilty of PEDs solely by virtue of his association with a French doctor.

It would be different if Le Mond had had direct knowledge and based his accusations on that...

He didn't and couldn't...