Lance Armstrong Possible PED Confession - (Oprah interview Jan 17)

[mattythedog]

I think they'll declare a no result. Trying to find a clean rider to give it to is going to be a nightmare.

 

[Emptyone]

Or, he might keep them, as there are suspicions over others finishing second and beyond too. In the case of Bjarne Riis, he kept his, but it was noted he doped beside his win. That being if the UCI take them away or not.

 

[Famine]

The USADA have no right to strip him of his titles as far as I understand, only the UCI can.

Wait until you see UCI's "suspicious list" from the 2010 race (key note: Bradley Wiggins scores a 5 on a scale of 0 [no suspicion] to 10 [probably a pharmacy]).

And this has been sent on by a friend who, three days ago was "He's innocent, it's a witch-hunt, there's never been any evidence of it". Here's a nicely relevant part:

But there’s a subscript to his cancer that hasn’t really been explored: Armstrong by his own claim is the most tested athlete on the planet, and given he enjoyed considerable success in 1996 and beforehand, would certainly have been subject to numerous doping controls. Some cancers - including the type Lance Armstrong had - cause enormously elevated levels of human chorionic gonadotropin hormone (hCG), a naturally occuring hormone in the body, but at low levels in males. Now, there are rules for the amount of HCG permitted in an athlete, because it offers a competitive advantage - not enough to overcome the deficiencies cancers cause, but a good advantage in a healthy human being, because it produces testosterone. An athlete is often considered to have failed a drug test if the urinary T/E ratio is greater than 6. So the UCI would have been testing for it.

But Armstrong never produced a positive sample. Compare that with Jake Gibb whose life, it could be argued, was saved by USADA’s testing, when it detected those enormously elevated levels in an anti-doping test, and advised him to see a doctor. That ultimately led to the discovery of testicular cancer, and Gibb recovered. Lance Armstrong wasn’t so lucky - so we can assume one of two things. Either the UCI’s anti-doping measures were woefully below standard, and didn’t detect Armstrong’s elevated levels of hCG, allowing his cancer to worsen while competing, or the UCI’s anti-doping discovered Armstrong’s elevated levels and didn’t report them. Either way, it’s a massive condemnation in the UCI’s ability to validate itself as a serious entity in drug testing. At best it’s woefully ineffective, at worst it’s simply corrupt.

With testicular cancer, Armstrong's HCG levels would have been so high he'd have generated a positive pregnancy test in any woman who spent more than an hour with him. He should have been leaking it out of his pores - Jake Gibb was and the positive tests lead to his diagnosis. But despite being tested routinely more than any other athlete on the planet, Armstrong never recorded a positive test for HCG, for some reason.

He proudly claims to have never tested positive... but that's not quite true either:

The most explosive issue though, was the discovery of Armstrong’s 1999 Tour de France samples. A test for EPO wasn’t available back in 1999, and so samples couldn’t be tested for it at the time. As was practice though, samples were stored in the event they could be retested later. After an EPO test became available, Armstrong’s samples were amongst a batch to be retested. Six of Armstrong’s samples tested positive for EPO, a result one of the world’s leading anti-doping scientists verified as being almost impossible to have occurred any other way than through drug usage. Chalk that up as another nail in the “never tested positive” coffin. Unfortunately, Armstrong wasn’t prosecuted (again!) on these EPO positives - the retests were for research purposes, not anti-doping ones, and so the UCI declined to pursue the matter further.

And don't forget to look up the lawsuit between SCA and Armstrong:

As part of [the testicular cancer] treatment, Armstrong, scared and with nobody with knowledge to consult about his condition, was asked in hospital whether he’d ever used any performance-enhancing drugs (PEDs). His response, as detailed by npr, and in evidence given by Betsy Andreu, was to list off a reel of drugs which he’d taken.

Betsy Andreu’s deposition was given and submitted as evidence years later, when SCA promotions was taken to court by Armstrong for non-payment of a bonus. SCA’s defence was that Armstrong had used PEDs, and they obtained Andreu’s evidence to defend that claim. Armstrong, by now estranged from the Andreus , had not spoken to them for years. But when he learned that the Andreus were to be subpoenaed, he made the extraordinary step of contacting Frankie Andreu in an attempt to influence his testimony, and that of his wife, Betsy, who declined to give a statement along Armstrong’s version of events. Frankie was rattled - he said in his evidence that he hadn’t wanted to testify but had been forced to by the subpoena - but he corroborated his wife’s version of events; that Armstrong had confessed to PED use. Armstrong, in a further attempt to intimidate Betsy Andreu when giving evidence, flew to witness her doing exactly that, sitting in the back of the room, saying nothing, and then immediately flying back home. In the process he attempted to characterise Betsy as fat, ugly, obsessed and jealous. Hard to characterise any of those as true if you saw her or listened to watch she had to say.

 

[Emptyone]

Ok, since seeing this develop over the past couple of days, I've found a lot that seems to suggest drug taking, from evidence such as EPO retests as Famine mentioned. I found a website from Reddit (It's fine don't worry), and it goes into detail about the sheer limits of human physiology and performance output, as well as noting changes in performance since EPO testing and the homologous blood transfusion test were invented.

This interview here documents the EPO for Armstrong in 1999, from a man who battles doping in cycling. This is a fair bit to read!

The website talks about decline in performance here. This backs the doping nature of Armstrong's career.

Also, there are reports (hushed) of Armstrong testing positive in the Tour of Switzerland in 2001, and covered up by the UCI.

EDIT: Famine your article says it all in one, that's pretty damning indeed.

 

[Touring Mars]

Perhaps the final nail in Armstrong's career coffin was delivered today as the USADA published their full case against him, including the personal testimonies of his former teammates, including his closest friend and right-hand man, George Hincapie. Hincapie has, for the first time AFAIK, confessed to doping and has now been banned from cycling, although he has also announced his retirement with immediate effect. Needless to say, Armstrong will not be able to write Hincapie's statement off as easily as that of other former teammates (and former friends) as if it were some kind of personal vendetta. Game over.

 

[mattythedog]

It's pretty conclusive stuff, especially George Hincapie confessing too. Now I think Armstrong just needs to admit it, it can't ruin him anymore than he already is.

 

[cgr-10]

it can't ruin him anymore than he already is.

However true that is, same thing could be said for him admitting or sticking by his guns. Either way, it can't get much worse, right?

 

[mattythedog]

I don't see the point of denying it anymore. Not when his closest friend has admitted he and Lance doped.

 

[PzR Slim]

However true that is, same thing could be said for him admitting or sticking by his guns. Either way, it can't get much worse, right?

If he does actually throw his hands up and admit it I think it would eventually get better for him but more importantly he could at a stroke do a very positive thing for cycling. Personally I think he will take it to the grave.

 

[Emptyone]

It's never too late to back down, but I think if he straight up admitted after the USADA decision he might be seen in a better light.

Also, I didn't post a relevant Velominati article at the time, but now seems appropriate.

 

[Touring Mars]

if he straight up admitted after the USADA decision he might be seen in a better light.

He didn't have the balls...

 

[Emptyone]

He didn't have the balls...

It's a shame really. After the Festina affair, cycling had a chance to turn round, but was then dragged back into the drug world by US Postal. Almost a decade of cleaner racing lost.

Actually, there is also a Velonews Podcast dedicated to Armstrong and the ramifications for the UCI aiding his winning, and potential corruption in the sport. It's an hour long, but excellent.

EDIT: The USADA report is up in full on their website. I've read up till 2004, it's completely
comprehensive, and there is no fighting it.

 

[mattythedog]

If anyone's interested, here's a link to a PDF of the report. http://www.scribd.com/doc/109619079/Reasoned-Decision

 

[ROAD_DOGG33J]

And now Hamilton is saying that he saw Armstrong use drugs. What will he do next?

Oh...Tyler Hamilton

 

[Dennisch]

Lance Armstrong's lawyer calls for lie detector tests all round

I foresee a long trial.

 

[hawkeye122]

The fact of the matter is the USADA keeps making these claims, but all I hear in the news is that they won't specifically say who said what. Hamilton and Landis have lied about drugs before...

Did Armstrong do drugs? Probably. But they've fought this battle for too long. Give it up. Both sides.

 

[Emptyone]

The specifics are laid out in the Reasoned decision, and the affidavits. There's no beating about the bush, you can read what they said. I can't see him scraping out on lie detector tests.

 

[Stotty]

The fact of the matter is the USADA keeps making these claims, but all I hear in the news is that they won't specifically say who said what. Hamilton and Landis have lied about drugs before...

Have you read any of the USADA report? They have published 1,000 pages of statements from multiple people clearly stating when and what happened.

Did Armstrong do drugs? Probably. But they've fought this battle for too long. Give it up. Both sides.

There's more to this than simply 'Did LA do drugs?'

He cheated... not once, but systematically, for years.

If everything in the report is true, he also pretty much 'forced' others to cheat too - people can say 'you can't force anyone to take drugs', but when professional cycling is your trade, and you're told you can't suceed unless you dope, you have few options. Plus he bullied those who tried to reveal the truth about him and ridiculed in public those who claimed cycling was a sport based on drug use.

He also lied under oath during his legal action against SCA in 2006... which may very well end up being the final nail in his coffin should SCA decide they'd like their £7 million back that LA sued them for.

'Give it up' is exactly what LA wants to happen... he knows he's in the **** up to his neck, and if he and his advisors can cast enough doubt on the evidence he stands a chance of at least maintaining his current life style.

If he was innocent he would have fought the original charge from the USADA.

 

[Dennisch]

Nike possibly involved in Armstrong case.



It gets darker and darker for Armstrong. With all of the people talking about him, even close friends and colleagues, it will become difficult to keep up the charade.

I think one of my greatest sport heroes might actually be a phony.



And I don't have many heroes.

 

[mattythedog]

Armstrong has stepped down as chairman of his charity. That's pretty interesting, that's the one thing he said he'd continue.
EDIT: And Nike have terminated their contract with LA. Saying "there is evidence that he doped and mislead Nike"
EDIT 2: Linky.

 

[Stotty]

Seems the net is closing in as it's just been announced that he's stepping down from Livestrong and NIKE have publicly dropped him.

How anyone can still believe he's innocent is beyond me.

Edit: Heh, treed!

Edit 2:

And now dropped by Trek and Bud... only a matter of time before Oakley follow suit. Plus he'll likely be banned from Ironman competitions too, loosing his income from that.

Even if he never goes to court for perjury, his personal income is going to drop to nothing.

 

[mattythedog]

UCI strip Lance Armstrong of his seven titles and ban him for life
It's finally over.

 

[Dennisch]

It's a sad day. I have officialy lost one of my heroes of sport.

 

[Stotty]

Hehehe... there's more to come yet.

Firstly there's the matter of SCA recovering their £7 million.

Then there's the UCI recovering their prize money.

Then there will be a perjury case at some stage.

Lance has a lot of money to pay out yet and likely some jail time.

 

[Emptyone]

Well, once a trickle, now a flood it seems. Remember the Triple Crown of cycling he won in 1993. Well seems like he may have bought it! source

This is damning, and the sworn disposition was given in 2006, way before now.

It's not getting any better for Armstrong.

 

[Stotty]

Latest news is the British Times is suing Lance for return of the £300,000 they had to pay him in liable damages following an article they published calling him out for drug use.

Including interest and legal costs the claim is £1 million.

Surprised SCA haven't started proceedings yet.

 

[PzR Slim]

Seems a confession to career wide doping is imminent, maybe only hours away. Wonder what those who so vehemently defended him have to say now?

 

[ExigeEvan]

Seems a confession to career wide doping is imminent, maybe only hours away. Wonder what those who so vehemently defended him have to say now?

That I was wrong.

But if we believed everything a group of people said without solid evidence then there'd be a lot of convicted innocents.

 

[Liquid]

My issue with the Tour de Harrogate is the cheating. Since its inception it's been the epicentre of cheating, doping oneself or drugging your opponents.

It makes professional wrestling look like a game of backgammon.

 

[mattythedog]

Lance Armstrong is going to appear on Oprah Winfrey's chat show next week. A lot of people think he is going to confess, I'm not so sure.