Lance Armstrong banned and stripped

Joseph27 · Post by **Joseph27** » 24th Aug, '12, 14:21

http://www.theage.com.au/sport/cycling/ ... 24qk5.html

This story made me sad - his battle against cancer, his sporting excellence all undone by these allegations. Unfortunately he is not contesting and so is no longer the 7 time champion.

Tas · Post by **Tas** » 24th Aug, '12, 14:50

I've been thinking about this since reading earlier. Isn't it a powerful thing to stand back and say I'm not going to let this affect me or take over my lfe. In some ways it takes the power away from them to say I don't care anymore?

The statements I've heard are that he doesn't have failed drug tests to defend and it's a he said he said situation that Lance Armstrong no longer elects to participate in the game of, condident in himself what he's achieved. The US org involved doesn't have the power to withdraw the Tour de France titles, it's another international body, and would need an evidence based submissionfor any committee to consider.

I wouldn't be surprised if he finds his sense of empowerment increased after making a difficult decision. It's just another perspective to consider I thought.

Joseph27 · Post by **Joseph27** » 24th Aug, '12, 15:16

Tas wrote:I've been thinking about this since reading earlier. Isn't it a powerful thing to stand back and say I'm not going to let this affect me or take over my lfe. In some ways it takes the power away from them to say I don't care anymore?

The statements I've heard are that he doesn't have failed drug tests to defend and it's a he said he said situation that Lance Armstrong no longer elects to participate in the game of, condident in himself what he's achieved. The US org involved doesn't have the power to withdraw the Tour de France titles, it's another international body, and would need an evidence based submissionfor any committee to consider.

I wouldn't be surprised if he finds his sense of empowerment increased after making a difficult decision. It's just another perspective to consider I thought.

Nice thought - he seems like such a nice guy. Have a great weekend all

Lichtgestalt · Post by **Lichtgestalt** » 24th Aug, '12, 16:36

Joseph27 wrote:http://www.theage.com.au/sport/cycling/ ... 24qk5.html

This story made me sad - his battle against cancer, his sporting excellence all undone by these allegations. Unfortunately he is not contesting and so is no longer the 7 time champion.

Finally I'd say. There has been evidence against LA, like re-testet blood sample from old Tour de France where EPO has been found but since only one sample remained they couldn't officially use it. Then you have several of his team mates who testified against him (and they used doping themselves so he would have been the only one not to have doped) and pretty strong facts which all point into the same direction. He would have won the tour against opponents who all were full with meds during the 90s....

He just got away so far because he sued everybody who even said a word against him and the UCI being afraid to lose one of his biggest stars.

baloo · Post by **baloo** » 24th Aug, '12, 20:05

Smart move. By giving up he effectively prevents the public from hearing the evidence against him.

Fat Bob · Post by **Fat Bob** » 24th Aug, '12, 20:14

It's a tough one - either he did or he didn't, but the tests at the time could not tell if he did or he didn't.

Well, whatever he did, legally or illegally, this bloke was at the top of his game for so long that it'll take another special athlete to overcome his record.

Such a shame that he couldn't have been caught or exonerated when it happened.

sluggo · Post by **sluggo** » 25th Aug, '12, 00:44

I suppose I should be on the side of LA as he is a fellow Austinite (from Austin TX) but it seems to me that where there's smoke there's fire and LA has plenty of smoke around him. I still hope it is not true but I'm afraid now we will never really know.

Lichtgestalt · Post by **Lichtgestalt** » 25th Aug, '12, 01:23

Fat Bob wrote:It's a tough one - either he did or he didn't, but the tests at the time could not tell if he did or he didn't.

But the later test done/initiated by L'Equipe could so it's pretty much clear but of course for a court sentence you needed 2 samples and the second one was destroyed or missing

Fat Bob · Post by **Fat Bob** » 25th Aug, '12, 07:59

And a report into those tests by a Dutch anti-doping head quite clearly said the tests were flawed, or so says wiki.

But there again, that report was blasted by WADA suggesting unprofessionalism....but there again, was that just to protect itself as the report criticised WADA.

Claim and counter-claim. That's all there's every been.

Lichtgestalt · Post by **Lichtgestalt** » 27th Aug, '12, 00:14

LA was suing everyone as soon as they raised a critical word and rather tried to stop investigations than clearing them up.

Tas · Post by **Tas** » 9th Jan, '13, 10:05

Well now, an interview with OPRAH to reveal all.

That's it, no respect left by going the Oprah sympathy route. I hate that sort of shyte.

Joseph27 · Post by **Joseph27** » 9th Jan, '13, 11:53

Tas wrote:Well now, an interview with OPRAH to reveal all.

That's it, no respect left by going the Oprah sympathy route. I hate that sort of shyte.

The 21st century form of public confession - 20th Century would have been appearing on the Oprah show, 21st is getting back for a one off act of contrition...

baloo · Post by **baloo** » 18th Jan, '13, 09:47

10:00am Discovery Channel (422 on Starhub)
Oprah chats to lance

expat yorkshire · Post by **expat yorkshire** » 18th Jan, '13, 10:53

also live streamed here

http://ownspecial.oprah.com/lancearmstrong.html

slinky · Post by **slinky** » 18th Jan, '13, 10:55

I can't be arsed to actually watch it. I don't get it, what benefit does he get by finally telling the truth after so many years of lying and covering up?

baloo · Post by **baloo** » 18th Jan, '13, 11:06

slinky wrote:I can't be arsed to actually watch it. I don't get it, what benefit does he get by finally telling the truth after so many years of lying and covering up?

By trying to get his version of the "truth" out there which may limit the amount he might be sued for, stop him getting jailed, or not hamper potential future earnings.

slinky · Post by **slinky** » 18th Jan, '13, 11:19

It would seem it could compound his legal problems, though, given it's now provable that he perjured himself in court numerous times.

baloo · Post by **baloo** » 18th Jan, '13, 11:55

slinky wrote:It would seem it could compound his legal problems, though, given it's now provable that he perjured himself in court numerous times.

I'd be shocked if his legal team didn't tell him it was time to confess and what to confess too with an eye to reducing Lance's pain.

slinky · Post by **slinky** » 18th Jan, '13, 11:58

I'm sure that's true. I doubt he's into doing it because he wants to feel better about himself.

The Singapore Forum

Lance Armstrong banned and stripped

Lance Armstrong banned and stripped

Re: Lance Armstrong banned and stripped

Re: Lance Armstrong banned and stripped

Re: Lance Armstrong banned and stripped

Re: Lance Armstrong banned and stripped

Re: Lance Armstrong banned and stripped

Re: Lance Armstrong banned and stripped

Re: Lance Armstrong banned and stripped

Re: Lance Armstrong banned and stripped

Re: Lance Armstrong banned and stripped

Re: Lance Armstrong banned and stripped

Re: Lance Armstrong banned and stripped

Re: Lance Armstrong banned and stripped

Re: Lance Armstrong banned and stripped

Re: Lance Armstrong banned and stripped

Re: Lance Armstrong banned and stripped

Re: Lance Armstrong banned and stripped

Re: Lance Armstrong banned and stripped

Re: Lance Armstrong banned and stripped