Lance Armstrong Banned and Stripped of TDF Titles

[Joe Low]

Because I don't agree with you?

I have stated my personal opinion (as have a few other hubbers) and a fact of life is that opinions vary on every topic under the sun. I could be wrong...you could be wrong...so what? Only time will tell.

You seem to have a total disregard for other people's opinion if it does not tie in with yours and I suggest you grow up and mellow the **** out; life's to short for such ****.

Opinions are not equal and yours, as expressed, is one of the lesser ones. Mellow the **** out is also not very mellow.

[petatodd]

Personally I don't think he doped, he didnt need to;

Oh dear. Have you written your letter to Santa Claus yet with your gift requests?

[ThaStig]

With this attitude, there is f**kall hope of this sport ever being clean.

I don't condone doping you CHOP!!!. (Name calling and shouting for effect only.) I'm merely stating my opinion/observation on how I think it may have gone down.

If it is proven that he is guilty then the book and the printing press should be thrown at him.

[TNT1]

If it is proven that he is guilty then the book and the printing press should be thrown at him.

 

Didn't they just do that?

[GrumpyOldGuy]

It seems somebody gets it without having to resort to name calling.

 

Hence the UCi refering the report to their legal team and not commenting on it till they have a legal view.

 

I suspect the USADA knows this may be a dead end but the trial by media will be damaging enough

 

......I think the UCI is more concerned about the alleged "gifts" from LA of $100 +k and the fall out from that. Should they not sanction LA (and I think they will) they will immediately be seen as been complicit in the scandal, the weight of the testimony is overwhelming, the information was gathered largely by federal investigation and the testimony is further supported and strengthened by the threat of perjury over the witnesses should they have concealed, lied about or manipulated evidence.

 

We have to remember LA chose NOT to defend himself at arbitration, so we cant say he wasn't given the opportunity, he was, he just chose to reject it, plus of course this is not a judicial court action, so they do not need to prove guilt beyond doubt to convict LA, all they need to show is that by a balance of probabilities (the testimony) LA doped and enforced a culture of doping on his team. In my opinion no legal office will reject the testimonies of so many close accomplices, friends and fellow riders, given under oath, during a federal investigation, with the threat of perjuring themselves and been convicted criminally as untruthful or inadequate, .......... people have gone to jail in civil courts with less evidence against them.

[TNT1]

......I think the UCI is more concerned about the alleged "gifts" from LA of $100 +k and the fall out from that. Should they not sanction LA (and I think they will) they will immediately be seen as been complicit in the scandal, the weight of the testimony is overwhelming, the information was gathered largely by federal investigation and the testimony is further supported and strengthened by the threat of perjury over the witnesses should they have concealed, lied about or manipulated evidence.

 

We have to remember LA chose NOT to defend himself at arbitration, so we cant say he wasn't given the opportunity, he was, he just chose to reject it, plus of course this is not a judicial court action, so they do not need to prove guilt beyond doubt to convict LA, all they need to show is that by a balance of probabilities (the testimony) LA doped and enforced a culture of doping on his team. In my opinion no legal office will reject the testimonies of so many close accomplices, friends and fellow riders, given under oath, during a federal investigation, with the threat of perjuring themselves and been convicted criminally as untruthful or inadequate, .......... people have gone to jail in civil courts with less evidence against them.

 

Meh, according to stiggy, it's all just opinions. Lance never doped. Mayhap that is just one man's opinion.

[TNT1]

I don't condone doping you CHOP!!!. (Name calling and shouting for effect only.) I'm merely stating my opinion/observation on how I think it may have gone down.

 

When did I or anyone else suggest that you condone doping?

[gummibear]

Personally I don't think he doped, he didnt need to; all that he had to do was make sure his helpers did.

So,you saying he was the drug dealer then?

[nathrix]

Edit: in The Observer this Sunday morning in the Uk...

Edited October 14, 2012 by nathrix ® ©™

[TNT1]

So,you saying he was the drug dealer then?

 

Wasn't he already called as much in the USADA report? Or is that just your opinion?

[Mr Legs]

the "case is not proved" that he doped. There is heresay testimony that he allegedly said he did etc etc.

Personally I don't think he doped, he didnt need to; all that he had to do was make sure his helpers did. I have said this previously on a different thread; that the main difference between Lance and his rivals was his team. They destroyed every-one before the finale and he was good enough to finish it off. Ask yourself this; how many of his team won or top 10'd in stages during his 7 wins; 2 - maybe 3 aside from TTT's. How many tested positive after leaving USPS/Discovery? Quite a few. He/JB could in theory lower the risk of exposure by keeping the helpers from winning thereby lessening the chance of a positive test. That is also why he can claim his conscience is clear that he never doped. Take note of what he's not saying. Just my 2.5c

 

Armstrong is a doper, get over it and move on.

[Mellow]

im sure some people her also believe that the easter bunny and santa are real... no one has proven that they are not real and its only hearsay if its said that they are not.

[gummibear]

Wasn't he already called as much in the USADA report? Or is that just your opinion?

 

My own opinion after reading the book and many French papers.

The French don't like LA much

[ThaStig]

Meh, according to stiggy, it's all just opinions. Lance never doped. Mayhap that is just one man's opinion.

You are very selective in your reading of my post; read through the whole thing and stop looking for key words.

Based on the testimony of witnesses it seems that there was a doping culture at USPS/Discovery; this could be used to hang LA/JB. Whether LA doped has not been proven yet, there is no eyewitness testimony, positive test, confession etc for the period 1998-2006. There is hearsay of failed test/s (not proven); alleged conversations and cover-ups (UCi is not confessing any time soon); this will be tested if JB etc takes this case to hearings.

Why is it so difficult to believe that LA could win without doping himself but doping his team to the eyeballs (this is cheating, unethical and i don't condone or agree with it); because after all it is the team who carries the GC contender to the brink of victory he just has to finish it off. EaAll Lance's main rivals had one thing in common; they did not have a team strong and dedicated enough to the "cause" to overpower the USPS/Disco's.

 

Lance was sly in not spending the money in contesting the charges, but rather leaving it to the UCI and others to defend their "honour" while he sits back to determine the evidence against him( thus doing his dirty work for him).

 

I've dealt with an unethical individual who operated in a similar fashion and it was only after concentrating on what he was not saying and looking at it from a twisted perspective that one discovered what was really going on.

[ThaStig]

So,you saying he was the drug dealer then?

No, he most probably organised/paid some-one else to visit a drug dealer if he is as sly as I think he is.

[ThaStig]

Armstrong is a doper, get over it and move on.

That is your opinion and here on the hub we value every-one's opinion.