Page 5 of 8 FirstFirst ... 34567 ... LastLast
Results 81 to 100 of 155
  1. #81

    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    4,742
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by heckles View Post
    Thanks for posting that link.

    Notice that you don't see many of those apparently "clean" finishers themselves coming forward to claim those titles, which might indicate that they fear their own possible PED activity will eventually be detected, and/or they would feel a little embarrassed to be pulled up from so many spots down the list.
    All credit to Garden Kitty for finding that link - I got it from an older post in the cycling thread.

    And yeah, I doubt most riders from the 1990s and 2000s would want anyone taking a closer look at their samples and activities during that time.

  2. #82
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Location
    Rejecting your reality and substituting my own
    Age
    30
    Posts
    11,005
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Vash01 View Post
    I don't think those early wins need to be considered here. Everyone starts somewhere. It's like comparing little league player with his pro career.

    For many years I actually believed that Armstrong was clean because he so vehemently denied it. Now I know he was just acting and he is still acting.

    The biggest problem I have with Armstrong is the way he destroyed people who questioned and even told the truth about his doping. He destroyed their careers and caused a lot of mental anguish to them. He even pressured his teammates to take drugs. They guy is almost a criminal in my mind.
    I finally caught up on AC360 about this, and the way that Lance described telling his 13-year-old son to stop defending him online because he did cheat broke my heart. Not because of Lance's supposed remorse, because there was something about his demeanor that said he didn't have the ability to fathom how much it devastated his son. That if he could, he would make the same decision again. Because he always has to win.

    I don't even know how he could be a role model for his own children like that.

    Quote Originally Posted by bek View Post
    Well how do we know that Lance was clean then? I was watching Anderson Cooper (etc) and they were asking some cyclist experts and they were saying no-they don't think he'd be anywhere near as successful without the drugs. Yes everyone was doing but Lance because of his money had access to the very best drugs, best doctors etc..

    In contrast Barry Bonds/Roger Clemons its clear they were great, great well before the Performance enhancers.
    But how could he have done it so well when he was just up-and-coming and wasn't so successful and rich? Some of the other folks doping used to be more successful than him and could also afford the best doctors, etc.

    I have no doubt that he would be a less accomplished cyclist without the drugs. But to say that he would have been a nobody without PEDs is a little preposterous. It almost presumes that someone higher up in cycling personally anointed him as the next great one, and decided they would take him under their wing and do all it would take to get this useless pipsqueak all the way up to the top. That's a little too conspiracy theory for me.

  3. #83
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Katellorizo
    Posts
    3,487
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Yehudi View Post
    Given that the US Postal Service, a government organization, was a sponsor of Armstrong's team, are there any actions the government can take in regards to this whole mess, aside from perjury or obstruction of justice?
    Yes.

    The Whistleblower Lawsuit Against Lance Armstrong: What to Expect Next

    In 2010, Floyd Landis, a former teammate of Armstrong’s, reportedly filed a federal “qui tam” whistleblower lawsuit against Armstrong and others. According to news reports, Landis’s whistleblower lawsuit charges that Armstrong violated the terms of the $30 million sponsorship contract he and his cycling team had with the U.S. Postal Service (USPS) by taking drugs to enhance their performances.

    Here are some answers to questions about qui tam whistleblower cases and what to expect:

    How can Landis as a whistleblower sue Armstrong?

    Landis can sue Armstrong under the False Claims Act, which allows whistleblowers to file lawsuits against individuals and companies to recover money the government has lost due to fraud. In this instance, Landis claims the USPS was defrauded of an estimated $30 million it paid to sponsor Armstrong’s team. The law sets a maximum penalty of three times damages plus penalties for each false claim – so Armstrong and the others could be liable for more than $90 million. Whistleblowers receive rewards as an incentive to help the government recover funds otherwise lost to fraud.

    Why can’t the public see Landis’s whistleblower allegations against Armstrong? The lawsuit was filed more than two years ago, according to news reports.

    The False Claims Act requires that qui tam whistleblower cases be filed “under seal” – meaning they can’t be seen by the public – so that the Justice Department has an opportunity to investigate the whistleblower allegations and decide whether to intervene in the case. In this instance, the public became aware of the lawsuit as a result of information leaked to the press.

    The seal is by court order, and the consequences for violating the order can be serious. The False Claims Act provides for an initial seal period of only 60 days, but the government generally asks the court to extend the seal period for months and often years while it is investigating. The seal in the Armstrong case expires Friday, according to news reports. If the court doesn’t extend the seal, the Justice Department will be required to tell the court whether it will join the whistleblower lawsuit. It also could say it hasn’t made a decision yet on whether to intervene and reserve the right to join the case at a later time. The lawsuit will be made public if the seal is not extended or the Justice Department joins the case.

  4. #84
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    3,079
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    So Landis, a cheater himself who knowingly bilked his supporters for four years to pay for bogus legal challenges, and who also doped as a USPS rider, is suing Lance for doping while racing for USPS? We shouldn't be surprised at the depths Landis will reach, since this was the same person behind the obscene calls to Greg LeMond, making reference to LeMond's being molested as a kid.

  5. #85
    Banned Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    In my bedroom flipping the light on/off
    Posts
    916
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    So what bothers me the most about this, is that Lance has ALWAYS been an athlete a world apart from everyone else. Growing up in Plano/Richardson he had no peer. I am still a supporter, he has done way too much for pediatric cancer to criticize him. I find it quite telling that all those titles have not been replaced. I'd bet that everyone (EVERYONE) was using at the time. Go Lance.

  6. #86
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Katellorizo
    Posts
    3,487
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    In my view of things, Floyd Landis has even less credibility than Armstrong, but that doesn't mean that his suit is without merit. He probably realized it's one way he can still make money from his cycling career.

    And while it may be true that all elite cyclists of Armstrong's era (and many others before and even after that) doped, there were plenty of people who dropped out of competitive cycling rather than dope.

  7. #87
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    3,079
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Vagabond View Post
    In my view of things, Floyd Landis has even less credibility than Armstrong, but that doesn't mean that his suit is without merit.
    It actually does have merit, but, man, that Landis guy is something else. Wish someone else had filed.

  8. #88
    INTJ
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    4,105
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Alex Forrest View Post
    So what bothers me the most about this, is that Lance has ALWAYS been an athlete a world apart from everyone else. Growing up in Plano/Richardson he had no peer. I am still a supporter, he has done way too much for pediatric cancer to criticize him. I find it quite telling that all those titles have not been replaced. I'd bet that everyone (EVERYONE) was using at the time. Go Lance.
    I don't understand this thinking at all. Just because a person has done something good doesn't mean that the bad stuff should just be overlooked. There's consequences for actions and Armstrong has put himself in a position through his actions that means he is going to be criticized and will have to face the legal consequences as well. I don't see how his charity work should have any bearing at all on how his treatment around the doping and his accomplishments (or non-accomplishments) in the the cycling world.
    "Beautiful things don't ask for attention." -The Secret Life of Walter Mitty

  9. #89

    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    17,017
    vCash
    1561
    Rep Power
    4990
    Quote Originally Posted by Alex Forrest View Post
    So what bothers me the most about this, is that Lance has ALWAYS been an athlete a world apart from everyone else. Growing up in Plano/Richardson he had no peer. I am still a supporter, he has done way too much for pediatric cancer to criticize him. I find it quite telling that all those titles have not been replaced. I'd bet that everyone (EVERYONE) was using at the time. Go Lance.

    Yes in Plano/Richardson he had no peer. But that doesn't mean he had no peer anywhere. Yes he won one world title before but he was hardly undefeated back then pre drugs..Drugs too effect different people differently.

    The fact two there is very likely folks that COULD have been competitive that perhaps quit precisely because they didn't want to dope. We will never know what he would have accomplished without drugs. But even he says he wouldn't have won 7 Tours De France. And there are cyclists who are clean. The French for example I've read make their cyclists who live in France do all kinds of testing.. (The most successful ones live with it)...

    And do you think his personal story and his work on cancer research didn't also get him attention/sponsors.. (I hate to be cynical). But this is a guy who sued newspapers for telling the truth about him....

    Don't get me wrong I'm glad millions of people with cancer at least benefited from Lance's selfishiness, it doesn't make him a good guy though.

    However there are other messages sent, and one of them is the message is drugs are okay.. And drugs including steroids do kill people and destroy a lot of lives.
    Last edited by bek; 01-21-2013 at 01:37 AM.

  10. #90

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Gwyneth Paltrow Fan Club headquarters
    Posts
    17,279
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    30411
    Quote Originally Posted by Alex Forrest View Post
    I find it quite telling that all those titles have not been replaced. I'd bet that everyone (EVERYONE) was using at the time.
    So what? Does that make it OK for him to have doped and then lied about it, bullied his teammates, and sued people who told the truth?
    You should never write words with numbers. Unless you're seven. Or your name is Prince. - "Weird Al" Yankovic, "Word Crimes"

  11. #91
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    3,079
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by bek View Post
    The French for example I've read make their cyclists who live in France do all kinds of testing..
    Not impressive on the face of it. The French may have their in-house doping regime, and thus test their athletes to ensure their samples at competitions will pass. Considering that the Tour de France is a highly prestigious race, it's unsurprising that French cyclists train in France.

  12. #92

    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    17,017
    vCash
    1561
    Rep Power
    4990
    Quote Originally Posted by heckles View Post
    Not impressive on the face of it. The French may have their in-house doping regime, and thus test their athletes to ensure their samples at competitions will pass. Considering that the Tour de France is a highly prestigious race, it's unsurprising that French cyclists train in France.
    Not all French athletes train in France because then they aren't subject to the strigent rules. The French always hated Lance not just for his attitude but because they know cycling and they knew what he was doing was fishy.

  13. #93
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    3,079
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by bek View Post
    Not all French athletes train in France because then they aren't subject to the strigent rules.
    It makes sense for a French athlete to train outside of France if the facilities or coaching for that particular sport are sub-par at home. That's not a problem in cycling, and considering that the TdF is held in France, it would be très bizarre for the French team to train elsewhere.

  14. #94

    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    17,017
    vCash
    1561
    Rep Power
    4990
    Quote Originally Posted by heckles View Post
    It makes sense for a French athlete to train outside of France if the facilities or coaching for that particular sport are sub-par at home. That's not a problem in cycling, and considering that the TdF is held in France, it would be très bizarre for the French team to train elsewhere.
    No from what I read on the forum French athletes who don't train at home, weren't subject to the more strigent drug testing.

  15. #95
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    3,079
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by bek View Post
    No from what I read on the forum French athletes who don't train at home, weren't subject to the more strigent drug testing.
    Understood. But since this topic is specific to cycling, and the cyclists are within arm's reach of their sport's officials, it's unsurprising that they endure more testing, especially when their particular sport has a problem with the drug issue.

  16. #96

    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    4,742
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by bek View Post
    The fact two there is very likely folks that COULD have been competitive that perhaps quit precisely because they didn't want to dope. We will never know what he would have accomplished without drugs. But even he says he wouldn't have won 7 Tours De France. And there are cyclists who are clean. The French for example I've read make their cyclists who live in France do all kinds of testing.. (The most successful ones live with it)...
    The Festina Affair involved quite a few high-profile French skaters; I believe the guys said that Christophe Bassons was the only one on the team who was clean. That was 15 years ago, true, but still - I don't believe cyclists of a certain nationality are/were cleaner than others; the testing is usually one step behind the people who want to beat it. I can believe, however, that some teams are cleaner than others.

    The history of cycling and the TdF is rife with substance use, well before Armstrong began his career. If cyclists quit the sport because of doping, I don't think that one can be blamed entirely on him, except in cases in which we know he was directly responsible for blackballing people. I agree that his dominance made things worse. Nonetheless, the problem was there before him; if we think of it, someone or someones got Armstrong involved in doping - I doubt he got up one morning and decided that it sounded like a fine idea, independent of the context of what was happening in the sport. But like other cyclists who doped extensively, it was still his choice to start down that road and continue on it, just as it was his choice to do the things that he did to cover it up.

    If I'm not mistaken, Frankie Andreu has stated that the doping at Motorola started in 1995. I believe him.

    Floyd Landis, OTOH, is about the least credible person I can think of.

  17. #97

    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    17,017
    vCash
    1561
    Rep Power
    4990
    Quote Originally Posted by Zemgirl View Post
    The Festina Affair involved quite a few high-profile French skaters; I believe the guys said that Christophe Bassons was the only one on the team who was clean. That was 15 years ago, true, but still - I don't believe cyclists of a certain nationality are/were cleaner than others; the testing is usually one step behind the people who want to beat it. I can believe, however, that some teams are cleaner than others.

    The history of cycling and the TdF is rife with substance use, well before Armstrong began his career. If cyclists quit the sport because of doping, I don't think that one can be blamed entirely on him, except in cases in which we know he was directly responsible for blackballing people. I agree that his dominance made things worse. Nonetheless, the problem was there before him; if we think of it, someone or someones got Armstrong involved in doping - I doubt he got up one morning and decided that it sounded like a fine idea, independent of the context of what was happening in the sport. But like other cyclists who doped extensively, it was still his choice to start down that road and continue on it, just as it was his choice to do the things that he did to cover it up.

    If I'm not mistaken, Frankie Andreu has stated that the doping at Motorola started in 1995. I believe him.

    Floyd Landis, OTOH, is about the least credible person I can think of.
    Of course the doping didn't start with Armstrong bt I'm pointing out that its not fair to say everybody was doping so its okay. There were even if a tiny few clean players who got driven from the sport. I believe he did blackball Bassons.
    Last edited by bek; 01-21-2013 at 12:50 PM.

  18. #98
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    3,079
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by bek View Post
    Of course the doping didn't start with Armstrong bt I'm pointing out that its not fair to say everybody was doping so its okay.
    You're right. The popular assumption that everyone was doping, therefore it's okay that Armstrong was also, is pretty disappointing. There's no way to know if "everyone" doped, and, even if they were, there's no way to know if everyone had equally effective doping regimes. It's not like these team doctors had public conventions at which they openly shared best practices.

  19. #99

    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    4,742
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by bek View Post
    Of course the doping didn't start with Armstrong bt I'm pointing out that its not fair to say everybody was doping so its okay. There were even if a tiny few clean players who got driven from the sport. I believe he did blackball Bassons.
    It wasn't okay, but that isn't the point I was getting at, but rather the suggestion that his success is what made clean riders walk away from cycling. Armstrong wasn't the person who made cycling that way; he perpetuated and worsened a bad situation, but it was going on well before his time, so if the culture of doping was driving people out, it's not only on him. The debacle that was the 1998 TdF certainly shows that. Bassons was targeted by Armstrong, but by a lot of other people too - because almost everyone was threatened by his willingness to speak out, including his own teammates.

    Take a look at this interview with Bassons from a few months ago. He's a classy guy, and he paints a troubling picture of what was going on in the sport and why he decided to walk away. That was the problem; it wasn't limited to specific people. The problems in cycling were such that one rider probably couldn't have done much to improve matters. At best, they could make the right choice and refuse to be a part of it. But nobody had the power to make everyone race clean.

    And do you think his personal story and his work on cancer research didn't also get him attention/sponsors.. (I hate to be cynical). But this is a guy who sued newspapers for telling the truth about him....
    His work has been primarily in the areas of awareness and support programs for cancer patients and their families, not research. I don't care why he did it - whether he is Mother Teresa reincarnate or a selfish jerk who was after positive press is immaterial. What matters is the results, and there are a lot of good things that Armstrong and Livestrong have accomplished.

  20. #100
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    3,079
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Zemgirl View Post
    His work has been primarily in the areas of awareness and support programs for cancer patients and their families, not research.
    Support programs are a good thing, but "awareness" tends to be a fuzzy objective. Awareness of what? That there's a disease called cancer, and a lot of people get it?

Page 5 of 8 FirstFirst ... 34567 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •