Lance Armstrong Banned and Stripped of TDF Titles

[petatodd]

LA's twitter profile

 

http://www.panarmeni...ng/news/128862/

 

 

PanARMENIAN.Net - Having won seven Tour de France titles is no longer part of Lance Armstrong's Twitter profile, The Associated Press reports.

As late as Monday, Oct 22 night, Armstrong's bio on the social media site included a mention of his seven Tour wins from 1999-2005, but reference to the race was removed hours after he was stripped of the titles by the International Cycling Union and banned from the sport for life for his involvement in what the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency described as a massive doping program.

Early Tuesday, Armstrong's profile said: "Raising my five kids. Fighting Cancer. Swim, bike, run and golf whenever I can." Previously, the profile said: "Father of 5 amazing kids, 7-time Tour de France winner, full time cancer fighter, part time triathlete."

 

Now if only Dopodor Contador accept's his dope verdict and stops waving his seven fingers around

 

 

About the first honest thing he's done in this whole sordid episode.

[DJR]

Absolutely brilliant, even better than Zapiros freefalling Armstrong. Sad that the rider is representative of not just Lance, but of all competitive cycling.

 

.

[fandacious]

Well let's rather ask, why not.

 

i think its safe to assume that anyone finishing a grand tour in the top 5 teams is on dope

[Wyatt Earp]

i think its safe to assume that anyone finishing a grand tour in the top 5 teams is on dope

 

It was a question whether any of the sprinters could possibly be on drugs.

I commented let's rather ask why not, meaning why would it not be a probability.

[dracs]

i think its safe to assume that anyone finishing a grand tour in the top 5 teams is on dope

So why would you not concede LA was an exceptional athlete in that case?

[Guest Omega Man]

So why would you not concede LA was an exceptional athlete in that case?

Cos irrational hatred is just that. Irrational.

Edited October 23, 2012 by Omega Man

[HappyMartin]

There is no denying that Armstrong was an exceptional athlete with exceptional tactical acumen. The cyclists he beat to win his 7 TDF titles were also exceptional in terms of ability and tactical acumen. He doped when he beat them, and we know that they doped while they tried to topple him. His superior skills meant that they were never successful so we can say it was a level playing field and so what we had a good spectacle and nothing lost. It was all fair in a way.

 

RUBBISH

 

What of the many other cyclists that had superior athletic and tactical ability but were also blessed or cursed with a moral fibre that prevented them from cheating in order to win? What of the hard working honest cyclists that never stood a chance of competing while clean? Those that walked away when they discovered the level of dishonesty required to compete. Those that walked away after a season or two when they saw first hand what was going on.

 

These lost cyclists could have been great characters and fighters that we would have admired as they raced and competed but we will never know them because they were not given a chance. They were forced out of the sport by the crooks, liars, cheats and dopers that we were instead offered as our heros and role models.

 

All that is left to us is a charade as we argue over who was the best doper thinking mistakenly that it was the only show available. There was another show but it was never seen.

 

Thanks Lance. Thanks Tyler. Thanks George. Thanks Floyd. Thanks Bjarne. Thanks Pantani. Thanks Millar. Thanks also to Fuentes and Ferrari. Thanks to the UCI. You all did us proud

Edited October 23, 2012 by HappyMartin

[mazambaan]

Hmmm, I see the WADA man says "everyone doped".

 

http://www.sport24.co.za/OtherSport/Cycling/WADA-chief-Everybody-doped-20121023

 

who was that pro cyclist who commented on the juiced riders that "he couldn't be expected to keep up with a motorbike". In hindsight, good chirp.

[Wyatt Earp]

 

 

Thanks Lance. Thanks Tyler. Thanks George. Thanks Floyd. Thanks Bjarne. Thanks Pantani. Thanks Millar. Thanks also to Fuentes and Ferrari. Thanks to the UCI. You all did us proud

 

Please, don't stop there.

Include Basso, Contador, Schleck, Millar, Vinokourov...............come to think of it, will we be allowed that many characters in a post ?

[jcza]

The World according to Lance - http://www.abc.net.au/4corners/stories/2012/10/11/3608613.htm

[eddy]

So why would you not concede LA was an exceptional athlete in that case?

 

I think we can conclude that LA was an exceptional athlete, in the sense that all professional sportsmen at or near the top are by definition exceptional.

 

Whether, within that group he was as good as his record would have had us believe, is not clear. There is no evidence that he would have been anything other than a good one-day racer, occasional early grand tour stage winner and mid pack finisher.

 

The myth that the playing field was level because they all doped, is not borne out by evidence. Rather the opposite is true.More money bought better regimes, those with bigger risk appetites (or who were politically better connected) sailed closer to the wind, and in any event even on identical programs, individuals have differing responses. So to infer ANY pre-doping capability from post doping performance is scientifically unsound, particularly in the modern era of red blood cell manipulation.

 

This is as good a place as any to start for those who want scientific insight into the effects of doping on endurance athletes, including cyclists:

 

http://www.sportsscientists.com/

 

For those whom have made up their minds and are unwilling to be persuaded by the facts, the is a good place to start:

 

https://community.bikehub.co.za/topic/117304-lance-armstrong-banned-and-stripped-of-tdf-titles/

 

I do assume that everybody with an opinion on this topic has at least read this and is familiar with the rules of arbitration, particularly as it pertains to evidence:

 

http://cyclinginvestigation.usada.org/

['Dale]

Can LA be *subpoenaed to be a witness in the upcoming Bruyneel arbitration?

 

*forced to engage and disclose, by law*

[JGR]

I think we can conclude that LA was an exceptional athlete, in the sense that all professional sportsmen at or near the top are by definition exceptional.

 

Whether, within that group he was as good as his record would have had us believe, is not clear. There is no evidence that he would have been anything other than a good one-day racer, occasional early grand tour stage winner and mid pack finisher.

 

The myth that the playing field was level because they all doped, is not borne out by evidence. Rather the opposite is true.More money bought better regimes, those with bigger risk appetites (or who were politically better connected) sailed closer to the wind, and in any event even on identical programs, individuals have differing responses. So to infer ANY pre-doping capability from post doping performance is scientifically unsound, particularly in the modern era of red blood cell manipulation.

 

This is as good a place as any to start for those who want scientific insight into the effects of doping on endurance athletes, including cyclists:

 

http://www.sportsscientists.com/

 

For those whom have made up their minds and are unwilling to be persuaded by the facts, the is a good place to start:

 

http://www.thehubsa....-of-tdf-titles/

 

I do assume that everybody with an opinion on this topic has at least read this and is familiar with the rules of arbitration, particularly as it pertains to evidence:

 

http://cyclinginvestigation.usada.org/

Eddy you raise good points but they can also be applied else where. It is hardly a level playing field when teams can afford better trainers, more training camps, altitutde traing ect so the element of having more money to spend on preperation does not stop at the drugs. Much like formula one - do you think Shumi would have won 7 if he stayed with Benetton? Bigger teams have more money for other advancements other than drugs so the field will never be level unfortuntely. The reaction to drugs is different for everyone but once again that can also be the case with something as simple as a cramp block pill or energy drink.

[jcza]

The omerta is not broken and pro-cycling is still rotten but I'm looking forward to the unveiling of the 2013 TdF route tomorrow.

[andydude]

Eddy you raise good points but they can also be applied else where. It is hardly a level playing field when teams can afford better trainers, more training camps, altitutde traing ect so the element of having more money to spend on preperation does not stop at the drugs. Much like formula one - do you think Shumi would have won 7 if he stayed with Benetton? Bigger teams have more money for other advancements other than drugs so the field will never be level unfortuntely. The reaction to drugs is different for everyone but once again that can also be the case with something as simple as a cramp block pill or energy drink.

 

Good counterpoints, but at the moment those other things you mention isn't illegal. The way you're argument is going is to only study someones body and genes and defer from that who is the best without cycling one mile.

[petatodd]

I enjoyed this from Cozy Beehive:

 

http://cozybeehive.blogspot.com/2012/10/crucifixion-and-reform.html?utm_source=thehubsa&utm_medium=forum&utm_campaign=petatodd

 

 

Crucifixion and Reform

 

 

 

 

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-SKm6wbbLW4s/UIXjf2pOFiI/AAAAAAAAIj8/DYo6Ql2DUxI/s400/lance+armstrong+god.jpg