HOT: Active* forum members generally gain 5% discount at starbike.com store!
Weight Weenies
* FAQ    * Search    * Trending Topics
* Login   * Register
HOME Listings Articles FAQ Contact About




Post new topic This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 2629 posts ] 
Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 ... 176  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Thu Jun 14, 2012 4:45 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Mar 18, 2005 4:12 pm
Posts: 2312
Location: eh?
53x12 wrote:
The Department of Justice already said there was no case against LA.


Huh, where did you hear this? No reasons were given for stopping the investigation.

This quote from various news sources in February:
"U.S. Attorney Andre Birotte Jr. announced in a press release that his office "is closing an investigation into allegations of federal criminal conduct by members and associates of a professional bicycle racing team owned in part by Lance Armstrong." He didn't disclose the reason for the decision, though Birotte has used discretion in pursing high-profile criminal cases before. "

Could have been anything from politics, financial efficacy, uncertainty of conviction, etc. But "no case", not so.

_________________
swinter wrote:
Mr.Gib got it right


Top
 Profile  
 
Posted: Thu Jun 14, 2012 4:45 pm 


Top
  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jun 14, 2012 4:48 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 15, 2006 6:02 am
Posts: 2294
Location: On the bike
Mr.Gib wrote:
Huh, where did you hear this? No reasons were given for stopping the investigation.

This quote from various news sources in February:
"U.S. Attorney Andre Birotte Jr. announced in a press release that his office "is closing an investigation into allegations of federal criminal conduct by members and associates of a professional bicycle racing team owned in part by Lance Armstrong." He didn't disclose the reason for the decision, though Birotte has used discretion in pursing high-profile criminal cases before. "

Could have been anything from politics, financial efficacy, uncertainty of conviction, etc. But "no case", not so.


No case as in no case worth bringing charges against or bringing to trial. For whatever reason. I doubt political pressure would matter in a case like this as Barry Bonds and Roger Clemens were also athletes and were brought to trial. D.C. doesn't care about athletes. Financial efficacy? LOL Have you seen the federal budget? lol Uncertainty of conviction is the most likely as they had a weak case with weak evidence that was mostly circumstantial. No case.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jun 14, 2012 4:54 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Oct 23, 2009 5:52 pm
Posts: 43
bikewithnoname wrote:
My view, Lance didn’t fail any test as such he is not a “cheat”. I do however believe he was doping, but at levels that kept him under the thresholds put in place by UCI etc, but that does not make him a “cheat”.


So you believe a cyclist doped, but because he wasn't caught, he didn't break the rules ("cheat").

...Really?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jun 14, 2012 4:55 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 15, 2006 6:02 am
Posts: 2294
Location: On the bike
Hendley wrote:
bikewithnoname wrote:
My view, Lance didn’t fail any test as such he is not a “cheat”. I do however believe he was doping, but at levels that kept him under the thresholds put in place by UCI etc, but that does not make him a “cheat”.


So you believe a cyclist doped, but because he wasn't caught, he didn't break the rules ("cheat").

...Really?



Yup. Seems pretty straight forward to me.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jun 14, 2012 4:57 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 04, 2006 4:43 pm
Posts: 5089
Location: Wherever there's a mountain beckoning to be climbed
motorthings wrote:
the highlight of all of this news is that I learned a new slang term for EPO: Edgar Allen Poe
now I will have an easier time buying it on the street (at least near the liberal arts colleges)!
Regarding hematocrit levels over 50%, Quoth the raven, `Nevermore.'

Or put another way
Regarding hematocrit levels over 50%, the raven wrote:
Nevermore


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jun 14, 2012 4:58 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Mar 18, 2005 4:12 pm
Posts: 2312
Location: eh?
mdeth1313 wrote:
Unless this causes sudden weight loss for someone's bike, please lock the stupid thread.


Are you on Lance's payroll? This smells of cover-up to me. Leave the thread alone.

_________________
swinter wrote:
Mr.Gib got it right


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jun 14, 2012 5:03 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Mar 18, 2005 4:12 pm
Posts: 2312
Location: eh?
53x12 wrote:
Mr.Gib wrote:
Huh, where did you hear this? No reasons were given for stopping the investigation.

This quote from various news sources in February:
"U.S. Attorney Andre Birotte Jr. announced in a press release that his office "is closing an investigation into allegations of federal criminal conduct by members and associates of a professional bicycle racing team owned in part by Lance Armstrong." He didn't disclose the reason for the decision, though Birotte has used discretion in pursing high-profile criminal cases before. "

Could have been anything from politics, financial efficacy, uncertainty of conviction, etc. But "no case", not so.


No case as in no case worth bringing charges against or bringing to trial. For whatever reason. I doubt political pressure would matter in a case like this as Barry Bonds and Roger Clemens were also athletes and were brought to trial. D.C. doesn't care about athletes. Financial efficacy? LOL Have you seen the federal budget?


FYI financial efficacy is more of a return on investment type concept. Not whether something is affordable.

_________________
swinter wrote:
Mr.Gib got it right


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jun 14, 2012 5:06 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Oct 07, 2011 2:08 pm
Posts: 1365
The trouble I have with this is the fact that all his main contenders have been caught cheating. If you take away his 7 tour victorys who will be named as the winners ? will Chippo now get to be a tour winner :lol:
If you remember early in the year George Hincapie was very tactful in his answers to the powers that be. I think Lance could be in a bit of bother this time as there will be a lot of mounting evidence and that could lead to a guilty verdict. In my mind he was a worthy tour winner because he never done anything that the other contenders were doing , It's not right but that was the way it was . This could really be a big hurt for cycling. If Lance is found guilty I can see sponsors pulling out left right and centre.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jun 14, 2012 5:17 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Oct 23, 2009 5:52 pm
Posts: 43
53x12 wrote:
Hendley wrote:
bikewithnoname wrote:
My view, Lance didn’t fail any test as such he is not a “cheat”. I do however believe he was doping, but at levels that kept him under the thresholds put in place by UCI etc, but that does not make him a “cheat”.


So you believe a cyclist doped, but because he wasn't caught, he didn't break the rules ("cheat").

...Really?



Yup. Seems pretty straight forward to me.


Yes indeed. I don't understand the argument at all. I think bikewithnoname is misunderstanding the purpose and role of testing protocols.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jun 14, 2012 5:27 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2011 12:11 pm
Posts: 14
I think there are 2 important victories to be had with Lance being finally "caught".

1. Perhaps by far the biggest and most important piece of this whole saga - that Lance somehow got the UCI or a lab to cover up positive results. If this proves true this would ultimately be the single most devastating indictment of the governing of cycling, the ultimate proof of its corruption. And it would show that Lance cheated in a way above and beyond his competitors. They all doped and getting caught was a constant risk, but if that risk did not exist for Lance then...

and 2. just the damn fact that he's the last champion of that generation to refuse to admit to doping. Virtually everyone at this point has come forward and admitted. Most have swallowed it and taken a suspension. It's almost such a routine part of a top rider's career. You get caught, serve your time, come back and apologize (or at least say something... at least make up some awesome excuse). But Lance is so 'effing stubborn. It's not like it was even just rider by rider case, it was totally normal, and I think you have to assume, that doping was systemic from team to team. Top down, organized and regimented. Controlled by doctors, managers, other staff...

If he would just stop making a joke of himself and come clean - its the only possible way for him to regain any credibility. Almost every single person around him came down in some way... holy hell just end it.

I don't even think any changes should be made to the results of the era, i still think that for the most part if you took away the drugs it would be mostly the same.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jun 14, 2012 5:31 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Jul 18, 2008 8:25 pm
Posts: 225
Location: UK
^^Agree it will hurt cycling lots and that’s the real shame here.

What converted me a few years ago is that Armstrong’s main defense is that he never failed a test - I guess <1% of tests at the time returned a positive, so as we know this is not really indicative of the wider peloton.

I think the hate towards Armstrong is driven by the fact that most cyclists & journalists that have followed the story from day one think/know he cheated, but the Armstrong machine is relentless and will stop at absolutely nothing to defend his name. So the absolute denial, dragging innocents through the mud (yes as well as cheats) and the fact this should have been put to bed years ago winding us all up.
The focus should now be on Cadel, Wiggins, etc, but the fact main media is reporting this story is very upsetting to real cyclists.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jun 14, 2012 5:32 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Feb 11, 2011 3:04 am
Posts: 2369
Location: Mississippi
heathhandsome wrote:
I

I don't even think any changes should be made to the results of the era, i still think that for the most part if you took away the drugs it would be mostly the same.


Key point.

_________________
Cervelo R3

http://weightweenies.starbike.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=125962


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jun 14, 2012 5:56 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2011 12:11 pm
Posts: 14
a much better writer elaborates on part of what i said in my point #2 above...
http://inrng.com/2012/06/usada-charges-armstrong/#more-9189

this goes above and beyond lance. this is a chance to take down the system cycling had become. the uci is so effed its hard to know where to start, and im not going to try. but this has a chance to really put a crack in it.

years ago i recall the UCI putting in place some rules about soigneurs, in some colossally tame effort to change the mechanized doping factories that the teams had become. they also said "no infusions" recently to demonstrate signs of testicular descension. this is a chance to go in and put perhaps a slightly larger dent in team operation as well.


Last edited by heathhandsome on Thu Jun 14, 2012 6:09 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jun 14, 2012 6:01 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Dec 28, 2009 8:30 pm
Posts: 3857
Location: Bay Area
53x12 wrote:
Hendley wrote:
bikewithnoname wrote:
My view, Lance didn’t fail any test as such he is not a “cheat”. I do however believe he was doping, but at levels that kept him under the thresholds put in place by UCI etc, but that does not make him a “cheat”.


So you believe a cyclist doped, but because he wasn't caught, he didn't break the rules ("cheat").

...Really?



Yup. Seems pretty straight forward to me.


So do you think OJ Simpson was innocent?

_________________
Don't take me too seriously.
Bike
Strava


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jun 14, 2012 6:15 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 15, 2006 6:02 am
Posts: 2294
Location: On the bike
mdeth1313 wrote:
Unless this causes sudden weight loss for someone's bike, please lock the stupid thread.


If you don't want to participate in the thread then don't open it. Every thread does NOT have to meet mdeth1313's criteria for being an acceptable thread.


KWalker wrote:
So do you think OJ Simpson was innocent?


Doesn't matter. He was found not-guilty. The burden is on the court to prove someone committed a crime. You know the whole, innocent until proven guilty right? Or did you just throw that out.


Top
 Profile  
 
Posted: Thu Jun 14, 2012 6:15 pm 


Top
  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 2629 posts ] 
Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 ... 176  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  

   Similar Topics   Author   Replies   Views   Last post 
There are no new unread posts for this topic. Rapha partners with Mellow Johnny's aka Lance Armstrong

in Cycle Chat

Posix1b

9

1646

Fri Jan 03, 2014 4:08 pm

sawyer View the latest post

There are no new unread posts for this topic. "The Armstrong Lie" movie

[ Go to page: 1, 2, 3 ]

in Cycle Chat

tymon_tm

36

2361

Sun Mar 02, 2014 10:08 pm

tymon_tm View the latest post


It is currently Fri Oct 24, 2014 7:24 pm

All times are UTC + 1 hour




Advertising   –  FAQ   –  Contact   –  Convert   –  About

© Weight Weenies 2000-2013
hosted by starbike.com


How to get rid of these ads? Just register!


Powered by phpBB