Lance Armstrong ... doping

The place for news, information and discussion about anything related to pro sports.

Moderators: rtb, kmax, SonomaCat

Post Reply
User avatar
LTown Cat
Golden Bobcat
Posts: 5577
Joined: Mon Mar 20, 2006 4:26 pm
Location: Lewistown, MT

Re: Lance Armstrong ... doping

Post by LTown Cat » Fri Aug 24, 2012 10:57 am

John K wrote:
CapitalCityCat wrote:
John K wrote:I don't believe for a second that Armstrong didn't use PED while winning his 7 TDF titles, but I don't believe he should have been stripped of those titles, since most of the other riders that he beat were probably also on PED.
I wondered... will they now credit the 2nd-place finisher (or maybe 3rd, 4th, 5th.... 43rd?) How far do they go down the list? :wink:
I was wondering about that too. I'm guessing they will just leave the title vacant for those years, but who knows?
So stupid--I hate it when they do this kind of thing! Like the year Reggie Bush won the Heisman...are we really supposed to think that nobody won it that year?



John K
Golden Bobcat
Posts: 8620
Joined: Mon Jun 11, 2007 11:04 am
Location: Great Falls MT

Re: Lance Armstrong ... doping

Post by John K » Fri Aug 24, 2012 11:10 am

Bay Area Cat wrote:Keep the faith, TIrwin.

As an aside, there was nothing "ignorant" about what I said. I'm quite well informed in the opinion I expressed.
I'm sure Armstrong's supporters still believe in the tooth fairy too. Are we really supposed to believe that 10 of his former teammates would lie about his use of PED? I mean if it was 1 or 2, I might be skeptical, but not 10. Winning 7 straight TDF titles is still an amazing accomplishment, and I believe that so many other riders were also using, that the playing field was pretty much level (except of course for those unfortunate few who really were clean), and that's why I don't necessarily feel that he should have been stripped of his titles, even if there is very little doubt that he was using PED.



User avatar
MashTun
2nd Team All-BobcatNation
Posts: 1473
Joined: Fri Mar 30, 2007 5:42 pm
Location: Near the fridge...

Re: Lance Armstrong ... doping

Post by MashTun » Fri Aug 24, 2012 12:41 pm

If the USADA was serious about improving controls they should focus on the current situation moving forward, instead of wasting money on a retired rider, even if it's Armstong.

IMHO those $/resources would be far better used responding to current issues than supposedly "sending a message" by going after Armstrong.

Don't give a crap about what they say, he's still the champ to me =D^


"Without question, the greatest invention in the history of mankind is beer. Oh, I grant you that the wheel was also a fine invention, but the wheel does not go nearly as well with pizza." - Dave Barry

User avatar
tampa_griz
Golden Bobcat
Posts: 5467
Joined: Thu Nov 17, 2005 1:37 pm
Location: St. Petersburg, FL

Re: Lance Armstrong ... doping

Post by tampa_griz » Fri Aug 24, 2012 12:49 pm

It seems odd that a sport so riddled with doping had a clean 7-time winner. But it's also odd that over 500 tests didn't reveal anything.



User avatar
TIrwin24
BobcatNation Hall of Famer
Posts: 3605
Joined: Thu Jan 11, 2007 1:00 pm
Location: Bow, WA

Re: Lance Armstrong ... doping

Post by TIrwin24 » Fri Aug 24, 2012 1:09 pm

tampa_griz wrote:It seems odd that a sport so riddled with doping had a clean 7-time winner. But it's also odd that over 500 tests didn't reveal anything.
This is the one fact that still amazes me.


"I've always followed in my father's footsteps, not necessarily because I wanted to, but because it is in my spirit."

-Singlefin Yellow

User avatar
SonomaCat
Moderator
Posts: 23960
Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2004 7:56 pm
Location: Sonoma County, CA
Contact:

Re: Lance Armstrong ... doping

Post by SonomaCat » Fri Aug 24, 2012 1:14 pm

MashTun wrote:If the USADA was serious about improving controls they should focus on the current situation moving forward, instead of wasting money on a retired rider, even if it's Armstong.

IMHO those $/resources would be far better used responding to current issues than supposedly "sending a message" by going after Armstrong.

Don't give a crap about what they say, he's still the champ to me =D^
It seems like the best way to clean up the sport is to go after the guys who profited from doping, to remove the incentive to dope for all current and future athletes. It seems like it would be a whole lot easier to alter behavior by removing the incentive to cheat that it would be to try to find ways to check every moment of every day to make sure that everyone in your sport isn't cheating.

It's kind of like those guys who do the Ponzi schemes ... isn't it a good idea to punish those guys in a very high profile way, so as to remove the incentive for others to go down that route as opposed to just letting them off the hook and instead trying to focus exclusively on hiring more SEC employees to investigate each and every other fund in the country to make sure it's not a Ponzi scheme as well?

All that said, even with the benefit of doping, what Armstrong accomplished was amazing (especially if most of the other riders were doping as well).



User avatar
MashTun
2nd Team All-BobcatNation
Posts: 1473
Joined: Fri Mar 30, 2007 5:42 pm
Location: Near the fridge...

Re: Lance Armstrong ... doping

Post by MashTun » Fri Aug 24, 2012 3:21 pm

Bay Area Cat wrote:
MashTun wrote:If the USADA was serious about improving controls they should focus on the current situation moving forward, instead of wasting money on a retired rider, even if it's Armstong.

IMHO those $/resources would be far better used responding to current issues than supposedly "sending a message" by going after Armstrong.

Don't give a crap about what they say, he's still the champ to me =D^
It seems like the best way to clean up the sport is to go after the guys who profited from doping, to remove the incentive to dope for all current and future athletes. It seems like it would be a whole lot easier to alter behavior by removing the incentive to cheat that it would be to try to find ways to check every moment of every day to make sure that everyone in your sport isn't cheating.

It's kind of like those guys who do the Ponzi schemes ... isn't it a good idea to punish those guys in a very high profile way, so as to remove the incentive for others to go down that route as opposed to just letting them off the hook and instead trying to focus exclusively on hiring more SEC employees to investigate each and every other fund in the country to make sure it's not a Ponzi scheme as well?

All that said, even with the benefit of doping, what Armstrong accomplished was amazing (especially if most of the other riders were doping as well).
It's not that doing what's been done has no value, it's that it has less value than looking ahead. Focusing on one famous past rider, to me has a lot less impact than penalizing active riders.

The money would be better spent with more controls, improving the existing controls, looking for emerging PED issues in the sport, and how to control for them. The only thing I see as productive in the past is to review how the controls during the years in question failed, and how to address those failures going forward.

If you're going to be serious about your approach, at least pick the upper echelon of past riders, say the top 20 or so for more scrutiny. Focusing on one rider, and not a broad spectrum of riders or improving the agency itself smacks of someone intent on making a name for themselves(Travis Tygart)


"Without question, the greatest invention in the history of mankind is beer. Oh, I grant you that the wheel was also a fine invention, but the wheel does not go nearly as well with pizza." - Dave Barry

User avatar
SonomaCat
Moderator
Posts: 23960
Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2004 7:56 pm
Location: Sonoma County, CA
Contact:

Re: Lance Armstrong ... doping

Post by SonomaCat » Fri Aug 24, 2012 3:41 pm

It appears that lots of other riders have been focused upon, in addition to Armstrong.

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/top-10-tou ... 00413.html

If ten of Armstrong's former teammates are testifying as to first-hand knowledge of Armstrong cheating, it would seem like a huge act of incompetence/negligence for a governing body to just ignore that. It would destroy their credibility.

And why not do both? Wouldn't it make sense to BOTH punish those who have cheated in the past AND work to improve the testing procedures to catch current cheaters? It's not a zero sum game, is it?



User avatar
MashTun
2nd Team All-BobcatNation
Posts: 1473
Joined: Fri Mar 30, 2007 5:42 pm
Location: Near the fridge...

Re: Lance Armstrong ... doping

Post by MashTun » Fri Aug 24, 2012 4:36 pm

Bay Area Cat wrote:It appears that lots of other riders have been focused upon, in addition to Armstrong.

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/top-10-tou ... 00413.html

If ten of Armstrong's former teammates are testifying as to first-hand knowledge of Armstrong cheating, it would seem like a huge act of incompetence/negligence for a governing body to just ignore that. It would destroy their credibility.

And why not do both? Wouldn't it make sense to BOTH punish those who have cheated in the past AND work to improve the testing procedures to catch current cheaters? It's not a zero sum game, is it?
Testified after practically being beaten over the head.

Well at least you'd agree there's worth to attacking the current problem. As for going back nearly 10 years, why stop there? Let's go back forever. Better look at it as a questionable era in the sport and move on. Same can be said for MLB. Put on asterix by Bonds, the Bash Bros, and move on.


"Without question, the greatest invention in the history of mankind is beer. Oh, I grant you that the wheel was also a fine invention, but the wheel does not go nearly as well with pizza." - Dave Barry

User avatar
MashTun
2nd Team All-BobcatNation
Posts: 1473
Joined: Fri Mar 30, 2007 5:42 pm
Location: Near the fridge...

Re: Lance Armstrong ... doping

Post by MashTun » Fri Aug 24, 2012 4:55 pm

Bay Area Cat wrote:It appears that lots of other riders have been focused upon, in addition to Armstrong.

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/top-10-tou ... 00413.html

If ten of Armstrong's former teammates are testifying as to first-hand knowledge of Armstrong cheating, it would seem like a huge act of incompetence/negligence for a governing body to just ignore that. It would destroy their credibility.

And why not do both? Wouldn't it make sense to BOTH punish those who have cheated in the past AND work to improve the testing procedures to catch current cheaters? It's not a zero sum game, is it?
It's not like these guys just came forward out of the blue, and that kicked off the investigation BAC. This is a prime example of what I have been talking about. They have been coerced into coming forward and telling what they saw/suspected. It's not like the info has been obviously laying out there for the taking, then of course it would destroy credibility not to pursue.

Why haven't these guys been interviewed years ago? The info was there. What is different now that this is the approach taken? Could not some of the same pressure been applied back when suspicions first surfaced? Was there not a mechanism in place for this?

Is the USADA a joke? This type of pursuit, years after the fact seems to not speak well of the USADA to be honest. Better to look at their own house first. I see nothing gained here, but a scalp. A nice line on the resume'.


"Without question, the greatest invention in the history of mankind is beer. Oh, I grant you that the wheel was also a fine invention, but the wheel does not go nearly as well with pizza." - Dave Barry

John K
Golden Bobcat
Posts: 8620
Joined: Mon Jun 11, 2007 11:04 am
Location: Great Falls MT

Re: Lance Armstrong ... doping

Post by John K » Fri Aug 24, 2012 5:06 pm

MashTun wrote:
Bay Area Cat wrote:It appears that lots of other riders have been focused upon, in addition to Armstrong.

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/top-10-tou ... 00413.html

If ten of Armstrong's former teammates are testifying as to first-hand knowledge of Armstrong cheating, it would seem like a huge act of incompetence/negligence for a governing body to just ignore that. It would destroy their credibility.

And why not do both? Wouldn't it make sense to BOTH punish those who have cheated in the past AND work to improve the testing procedures to catch current cheaters? It's not a zero sum game, is it?
It's not like these guys just came forward out of the blue, and that kicked off the investigation BAC. This is a prime example of what I have been talking about. They have been coerced into coming forward and telling what they saw/suspected. It's not like the info has been obviously laying out there for the taking, then of course it would destroy credibility not to pursue.

Why haven't these guys been interviewed years ago? The info was there. What is different now that this is the approach taken? Could not some of the same pressure been applied back when suspicions first surfaced? Was there not a mechanism in place for this?

Is the USADA a joke? This type of pursuit, years after the fact seems to not speak well of the USADA to be honest. Better to look at their own house first. I see nothing gained here, but a scalp. A nice line on the resume'.
Would you feel differently, if you were a rider who was "clean" while competing against Armstrong and others who used PED during all of his TDF wins?



User avatar
SonomaCat
Moderator
Posts: 23960
Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2004 7:56 pm
Location: Sonoma County, CA
Contact:

Re: Lance Armstrong ... doping

Post by SonomaCat » Fri Aug 24, 2012 5:09 pm

Better now than never. There's no statute of limitations for this kind of thing, so just because you get away with it at the time doesn't mean you get away with it forever.

If ten of his teammates are testifying that they have knowledge of his cheating, then one has to present one incredibly compelling theory as to why all of them would be lying about something like that to sway me to believe that he was clean. And if he wasn't clean, I would think that everyone would agree that he should be punished for that (just like anyone else).

Peeling away all of the distracting arguments put forth by the Armstrong camp (including the "unconstitutional" argument, which I found to be particularly loaded and inappropriate), it seems like it should just come down to one simple question -- did he cheat or not? If yes, then I can't see any valid reason for anyone to be upset with the punishment.



John K
Golden Bobcat
Posts: 8620
Joined: Mon Jun 11, 2007 11:04 am
Location: Great Falls MT

Re: Lance Armstrong ... doping

Post by John K » Fri Aug 24, 2012 5:09 pm

Granted, I don't believe there were many riders who didn't use PED during that era, but there must have been a few, and it would be interesting to hear their thoughts about Armstrong being busted.



User avatar
SonomaCat
Moderator
Posts: 23960
Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2004 7:56 pm
Location: Sonoma County, CA
Contact:

Re: Lance Armstrong ... doping

Post by SonomaCat » Sat Aug 25, 2012 10:13 am

Here's an interesting and passionate discussion on the topic from one of my facebook friends:
Dear casual and less than casual cycling fans. Contrary to the Nike commercials or Livestrong public service announcements you may have been inundated with over the past 10 years, Lance Armstrong is not a god. He doped. A lot. It is, in fact, possible for 1 person to do both good things and bad things throughout the course of their life.

[Comment] He doped in a race full of people who also doped.

I look forward to the day when the TDF resigns itself to the same sort of introspection that pro weight lifting arrived at years ago. Something like, "Well. ******. It turns out that Everyone in our sport who wins, cheats. Where do we go from here?"


[Respnse] On the contrary, I think cycling has gotten dramatically cleaner since 2008/2009. I firmly believe that cycling is doing more to prevent doping now than any other sport...see the biological passport, working with pharma companies to develop tests for many drugs before they even hit the commercial market, etc. Sure, there are still dopers but I would put the number at maybe 10-20% of the peleton now rather than the 80-90% 10 years ago.

The thing that annoys me the most about armstrong isn't that he doped, it's that he systematically destroyed the lives of anyone who spoke out against him or doping (see Christophe Bassons, filippo simeoni or Frankie Andreau). The other annoying thing is that this indictment supposedly had evidence of his doping after his comeback. SO he left a dirty sport, it managed to clean itself up considerably, then he comes back to infect it again. At the time of his comeback he was teammates with 2-3 of the most promising, young (and impressionable) Americans. What happens if he manages to convince them that doping is everywhere and they have to do it to compete? Now we're back in 1995 all over again.

People say it's a witch hunt and that they are targeting him. That's probably true. But at the same time, you have to take off the head to kill the snake.

[Comment] Thanks for the insight. I knew such a moment was coming, but didn't realize it (regulation) had come quite as successfully as you describe.

I also knew that Armstrong was often the crazy brand of Texan, but am sorry to learn about the returns to badness you describe.

I'd read, I think yesterday, that Landis was being forced to return all the dollars he solicited for his own legal defense re: doping? So... y'know... at least Lance can take some comfort in the notion that he's not the only one getting picked on.

[Comment]....what are you really saying? He "dated" Sheryl Crow, which by default would make him a god, right?

[Comment] I blame Obama....

[Comment] its a witch hunt... because there is a witch.



ilovethecats
Golden Bobcat
Posts: 6509
Joined: Wed Nov 24, 2010 8:12 pm

Re: Lance Armstrong ... doping

Post by ilovethecats » Sun Aug 26, 2012 6:33 pm

MashTun wrote: Put on asterix by Bonds, the Bash Bros, and move on.
i might be mistaken but i don't believe bonds ever tested positive either right? seems like those backing armstrong always turn to that which i admit has stumped me. as TI said earlier, armstrong was tested countless times and always passed. well bonds was tested a bunch too. yet more people than not feel that he was juicing. and it appears that more people than not feel the same about lance. and who knows....maybe we're all wrong about all of them. hell, mcgwire never tested positive either but later admitted to steroid use.



User avatar
MashTun
2nd Team All-BobcatNation
Posts: 1473
Joined: Fri Mar 30, 2007 5:42 pm
Location: Near the fridge...

Re: Lance Armstrong ... doping

Post by MashTun » Sun Aug 26, 2012 8:03 pm

ilovethecats wrote:
MashTun wrote: Put on asterix by Bonds, the Bash Bros, and move on.
i might be mistaken but i don't believe bonds ever tested positive either right? seems like those backing armstrong always turn to that which i admit has stumped me. as TI said earlier, armstrong was tested countless times and always passed. well bonds was tested a bunch too. yet more people than not feel that he was juicing. and it appears that more people than not feel the same about lance. and who knows....maybe we're all wrong about all of them. hell, mcgwire never tested positive either but later admitted to steroid use.
What is your point? Read this a couple times and it's not clear to me.

I put that in as a comparison of a situation in which the person wasn't "convicted", but popular opinion runs to guilt. That's it.

If you perceived I was comparing the level of testing between the sports, I wasn't. There is no comparison as I have previously noted on many many threads.


"Without question, the greatest invention in the history of mankind is beer. Oh, I grant you that the wheel was also a fine invention, but the wheel does not go nearly as well with pizza." - Dave Barry

ilovethecats
Golden Bobcat
Posts: 6509
Joined: Wed Nov 24, 2010 8:12 pm

Re: Lance Armstrong ... doping

Post by ilovethecats » Sun Aug 26, 2012 8:19 pm

MashTun wrote:
ilovethecats wrote:
MashTun wrote: Put on asterix by Bonds, the Bash Bros, and move on.
i might be mistaken but i don't believe bonds ever tested positive either right? seems like those backing armstrong always turn to that which i admit has stumped me. as TI said earlier, armstrong was tested countless times and always passed. well bonds was tested a bunch too. yet more people than not feel that he was juicing. and it appears that more people than not feel the same about lance. and who knows....maybe we're all wrong about all of them. hell, mcgwire never tested positive either but later admitted to steroid use.
What is your point? Read this a couple times and it's not clear to me.

I put that in as a comparison of a situation in which the person wasn't "convicted", but popular opinion runs to guilt. That's it.

If you perceived I was comparing the level of testing between the sports, I wasn't. There is no comparison as I have previously noted on many many threads.
no i think you got what i was saying. i too wasn't comparing the sports as i agree they're not even close. i was just pointing out that despite never testing positive, people seem very convinced that bonds, mcgwire and others were juicing. despite lance never testing positive, many people seem to think he was juicing. you are obviously a fan of cycling and lance and i can tell you seem passionate about the issue. i likely look at it differently as i have never had much interest in the sport. i have just always found it interesting how so many people are convinced that barry bonds was cheating but many others want to belive lance was clean despite the common fact that neither ever tested positive.

sorry if my post was confusing.



User avatar
SonomaCat
Moderator
Posts: 23960
Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2004 7:56 pm
Location: Sonoma County, CA
Contact:

Re: Lance Armstrong ... doping

Post by SonomaCat » Tue Sep 04, 2012 1:32 pm

I suppose we'll see a lot of people who have been thrown under the bus by Armstrong in the past, when he had the power to do so, coming out and telling their stories now.

http://www.outsideonline.com/outdoor-ad ... tml?page=1




CapitalCityCat
Member # Retired
Posts: 2410
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2008 11:52 pm

Re: Lance Armstrong ... doping

Post by CapitalCityCat » Wed Sep 05, 2012 4:19 pm

Tyler Hamilton was on the Today show this morning promoting that book. Here's a quote from that interview.
“First of all, I passed hundreds of tests when I probably shouldn’t have,’’ Hamilton said. “The United States doping association, they’ve been doing a fantastic job in improving their tests, but back in the day at the time I was riding, we had doctors that were one step ahead of the testers.’’


Retiring my moniker. It's time to ride off into the sunset. It's been a fun ride. Go Cats.

Post Reply