cougarguard.com — unofficial BYU Cougars / LDS sports, football, basketball forum and message board

- Cycling (http://www.cougarguard.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=20)

- - Lance and 60 minutes (http://www.cougarguard.com/forum/showthread.php?t=27904)

Quote:

Originally Posted by MikeWaters (Post 313810)

As did hundreds of others.

That Lance never got caught doesn't make him in anyway unusual or less guilty.

Marion Jones was also never caught and used the same explanation as Lance: never had a positive test.

She went to prison.

All the other cyclists who were busted--they competed and cheated many years without being caught.

And now in fact, there is strong evidence that Lance was in fact caught, but that the positive test was made to go away. Including evidence that Lance and Bruyneel met with the lab director (highly unusual). It might be this very situation that lands Lance Armstrong in prison.

In seeing a few cyclists busted here and there, we have only seen the tip of the iceberg.

I don't believe you can make a persuasive argument why this process is justified. As many already note, "meh" is all I can say.

I don't expect athletes at the top to avoid taking risks and pushing the limits of the rules. I really don't. These type of prosecutions are meaningless and harmful to society at large. I wish ill will upon the prosecutor. Apparently you disagree and prefer to see cycling destroyed.

I remain unimpressed Marion Jones went to jail. I don't believe she should have. These sorts of prosecutions do not improve the economy or cause people to be honest. It is a harmful pursuit but there is always a Nazi around willing to win meaningless cases.

Evidence of MULTIPLE failed tests by Armstrong.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/201...2_a3&eref=sihp

I include in that the multiple samples of physiologically unlikely/impossible testosterone levels, but before it was considered threshold for doping.

Are you impressed with this sort of journalism? I am not, and know there is so little that it may or may not be true. But because people will read the story, they're happy to chase phantoms even if untrue. You're willing to buy whatever they sell.

I remain unconcerned, and unimpressed. He passed the tests under the then existing standards, but because his competitors did not some are committed to bringing him down. Both have biases so all may be liars. That's most probable.

Are you impressed with Lance's character attacks?

One of the events that made a very distinct impression on me was during one of the Lance's TdF wins, there was a rider in the peleton that had cooperated with authorities in reporting doping that led to consequences for other riders (I don't remember the names). This guy was a nobody on the tour, no chance of winning. But everytime he would try to join a breakaway, Lance himself would charge forward to join the breakaway, dooming it. Finally the other breakaway riders were getting pissed at this guy, saying you are screwing things up.

The Versus commentators said Lance was showing who was boss.

Actually Lance was just enforcing his code: anyone that cooperates with authorities in implicating doping by other riders will be frozen out and dealt with harshly. Omerta.

To me, that was the most blatant proof (to that point) that Lance was involved in doping.

And now all reports point to Lance actually initiating, organizing and distributing doping products. Not just a drug user, but a drug peddler.

Lance is a man that has attempted to destroy people who tell the truth. He is scum.

Sure he still has defenders. But quickly their character is revealed as well.

I am unimpressed by the process altogether.

This is a sport, and it's supposed to be entertainment and to show spectators who is the best.

So in sport, where money's involved, competitors try to gain an advantage. Once one athlete tries to do something another wants to stay even.

I just want to see Americans win, or some athlete from somewhere else who captures my imagination. I don't believe an athlete "cheating" to gain an advantage in terms of athletic performance by enhancements is worthy of the scrutiny involved.

We have real crimes, such as murders, stolen money, stolen merchandise, insider trading, which go unnoticed and unprosecuted. To chase after athletes is a waste of taxpayer monies.

I just want to watch the athletes play or win. I don't care of Barry Bond juiced or what Alberto Contador did. I enjoy watching the chases. That is what I pay to see. I assume they are all cheating but still enjoy the performances. Some push the boundaries further than others.

In basketball, the players game the referees to get them not to call something or to cause the refs to call a charge even if it is not really a charge. I see these sorts of enhancements along the same lines.

another enthusiast wrote this.

Quote:

Officially he has never tested positive at all. There are claims, and Hamilton renewed them, that he did test positive in the 2001 Tour de Suisse, which is a race that he used as a tune up for the Tour a few times. The claim is that he paid hush money to the UCI to cover up this result. I am a little skeptical about this claim. First, the supposed hush money was made in two payments. $25,000 at or near the time (and that is really not that much money) and then $100,000 several years later. The latter payment was not covered up, however, but was talked about openly by LA's camp. Indeed it was proclaimed as proof of his commitment to anti-doping efforts. I guess it is possible he would be that cheeky, but that does seem to be pushing it a bit.

Second, the only hard evidence of which I am aware is a letter from the Tour de Suisse in which there was a statement that LA's results (and presumably we are talking about his hematocrit levels) were suspicious. The letter does not say in what way they were suspicious and it is not a claim that they exceeded any limit. This letter was followed by a meeting between the testing lab, a UCI official and Bryneel and LA. That might be seen as suspicious, but it is also something that would happen based on the letter in the complete absence of a positive result.

Moreover, Hamilton claims that LA told him, long after it happened, about the positive test in the Tour de Suisse. I highly, highly doubt that. Even Landis, who was a close confidant of LA, acknowledged how careful LA was and how he never talked openly about these things. Remember Landis' story about how the Team bus would pull over, feigning mechanical problems, so that the team could shoot up? He also says that LA did NOT inject in front of the team, even under those circumstances. Yet we are supposed to believe that LA would jokingly tell Hamilton about some smoking gun evidence against him? I doubt it.

But remember, most of these guys never tested positive, either. Michael Rasmussen was caught based on out of competition failures to appear for tests (which led to other info). Ullrich and Basso were caught through their participation in Operacion Puerto, which was the Spanish doctor doping operation where the investigators found bags of saved blood in the doctor's fridge with the racers' names on it. None of these guys actually tested positive in or after a race. So while the lack of a positive test over so long a period is important, it is by no means dispositive.

At a personal level, I absolutely hate that as a bike fan I have had to learn so much about doping procedures and testing protocols. There is no question it has sucked some of the fun out of the sport for me, whether or not these guys cheated.

I agree with many of his personal observations.

Yes, duh, most in the sport have never tested positive while doping.

I guess Lance will find out that while his lieutenants were loyal, they aren't willing to do time in the clinker for him.

Quote:

Originally Posted by MikeWaters (Post 313819)

Yes, duh, most in the sport have never tested positive while doping.

I guess Lance will find out that while his lieutenants were loyal, they aren't willing to do time in the clinker for him.

Neither should there be for anybody. That is the travesty.

so there should be no laws regulating distribution of medications and drugs, and if there are laws, then they shouldn't be enforced?

Quote:

Originally Posted by MikeWaters (Post 313822)

so there should be no laws regulating distribution of medications and drugs, and if there are laws, then they shouldn't be enforced?

Trolling doesn't work with me.

How pray tell do you deduce athletic performance enhancing drugs and their usage is the subject of this investigation? It certainly doesn't deal with physicians dispensing medications without a prescription.

Nowitzsky doesn't give a hoot about that, but in making or continuing his name. I really don't know what public policy this investigation advances.