# What's Going to Happen to Lance?



## JasonB176 (Aug 18, 2011)

So what’s next for Lance? Now that Hamilton's book has been out for about week there have to be shockwaves going through the cycling community. I just finished the book and it doesn’t sound for sure that he knew what to expect. Tyler was very disappointed the federal investigation was stopped but seemed reasonably optimistic that something would come out of the current charges from the USADA.

Lance has an amazing ability to avoid punishment by using his vast resources. Will it be a case that the USADA strips him of the titles but UCI still recognizes them? Will he actually have to give money back to sponsors? Will there be any other repercussions other than him no longer being able to compete?

At the very least I feel Tyler’s book is a game changer. Cyclists may keep trying to dope but the curtain has been pulled back now.


----------



## spookyload (Jan 30, 2004)

Pulled back on the past maybe. He will not come within 100 yards of current racing and racing teams. He is getting his second fifteen minutes of fame. There isn't a pro cyclist who will tell him the time of day any more. He will fade away when he has no new information to exploit. I hope all of these Lance haters are happy knowing the money they spend to gain "inside" knowledge from him are comfortable knowing they are making him a rich man. His cycling career is over because he couldn't help himself from cheating, so why not cash in one last time at the expense of folks of those around you.

I am really curious to see if Floyd Landis puts a book out to cash in on this bandwagon too.


----------



## bayAreaDude (Apr 13, 2012)

Maybe he'll get cancer again.


----------



## trailrunner68 (Apr 23, 2011)

spookyload said:


> I am really curious to see if Floyd Landis puts a book out to cash in on this bandwagon too.


If Hamilton's book is successful, more will follow.

I hope Landis does write another book. He seems a lot more blunt and interesting than Hamilton. He should do a few more interviews with Kimmage and let Kimmage assemble it into a book.


----------



## Big-foot (Dec 14, 2002)

He'll retire to San Clemente, write his memoirs and eventually be considered an elder statesman.


----------



## tednugent (Apr 26, 2010)

continue to build a lasting legacy through Livestrong


----------



## Cpk (Aug 1, 2009)

Big-foot said:


> He'll retire to San Clemente.


Sounds good to me, that's one of the few places in southern CA I'd consider living


----------



## spade2you (May 12, 2009)

bayAreaDude said:


> Maybe he'll get cancer again.


I think 3-4 Doping Forumites would openly celebrate and have a get together kegger.


----------



## spade2you (May 12, 2009)

Chris-X said:


> Are this and the post you responded to worthy contributions? ut::crazy::nonod:


Just calling it how I see it. If I truly felt so strongly, I wouldn't take offense because I have juevos.


----------



## den bakker (Nov 13, 2004)

spade2you said:


> Just calling it how I see it. If I truly felt so strongly, I wouldn't take offense because I have juevos.


3-4? names? don't be shy,


----------



## spade2you (May 12, 2009)

den bakker said:


> 3-4? names? don't be shy,


I think they're a little too sensitive to admit it. I don't need to get banned (this week). Next week is ok.


----------



## den bakker (Nov 13, 2004)

spade2you said:


> I think they're a little too sensitive to admit it. I don't need to get banned (this week). Next week is ok.


yeah hide behind Cools skirt.


----------



## spade2you (May 12, 2009)

den bakker said:


> yeah hide behind Cools skirt.


They're they're the type who can dish it but can't take it. Not hiding at all. Probably shouldn't have said it, but I stand behind it. The hatred of Lance here is an obsession by a few. Got a problem with _this_ statement? I just like trolling them because it's even easier than trolling guitarists.


----------



## den bakker (Nov 13, 2004)

spade2you said:


> They're they're the type who can dish it but can't take it. Not hiding at all. Probably shouldn't have said it, but I stand behind it. The hatred of Lance here is an obsession by a few. Got a problem with _this_ statement? I just like trolling them because it's even easier than trolling guitarists.


no you don't stand behind anything when push comes to shove apparently. all fluff.


----------



## spade2you (May 12, 2009)

den bakker said:


> no you don't stand behind anything when push comes to shove apparently. all fluff.


It doesn't take a rocket surgeon to figure out who I'm talking about. Anyone who isn't obsessed can see that. Hell, the fact that I don't hate Lance practically makes me fanboy in these thar parts. 

The fact that I've gotten a reaction without even dropping a single name says a lot. Have fun.


----------



## den bakker (Nov 13, 2004)

spade2you said:


> It doesn't take a rocket surgeon to figure out who I'm talking about. Anyone who isn't obsessed can see that. Hell, the fact that I don't hate Lance practically makes me fanboy in these thar parts.
> 
> The fact that I've gotten a reaction without even dropping a single name says a lot. Have fun.


I am. on your behalf.


----------



## spade2you (May 12, 2009)

den bakker said:


> I am. on your behalf.


..and what have you won?


----------



## Fireform (Dec 15, 2005)

Just out of curiosity Spade--have you read Tyler's book?


----------



## spade2you (May 12, 2009)

Fireform said:


> Just out of curiosity Spade--have you read Tyler's book?


Nope. 6-7 novels ahead, riding, brewing, and a newborn ahead of anything new.


----------



## Fireform (Dec 15, 2005)

Lance comes off as someone overdue for justice is all. I don't think it's necessary to be obsessed with Lance to see his reckoning as key to sea change in pro cycling.


----------



## Fireform (Dec 15, 2005)

Congrats on the newborn btw. Welcome to the world of training while sleep-deprived.


----------



## spade2you (May 12, 2009)

Fireform said:


> Lance comes off as someone overdue for justice is all. I don't think it's necessary to be obsessed with Lance to see his reckoning as key to sea change in pro cycling.


Of course he's due to admit it since virtually all of his peers were caught and he wasn't exactly a nice guy. However, unless we're willing to pull Pantani, Ulrich, Riis, Fignon, etc. from the top step of the podium, I can't accept that it's not a witch hunt. 



Fireform said:


> Congrats on the newborn btw. Welcome to the world of training while sleep-deprived.


It has been a great new adventure. I'm not pleased with my sudden drop in power, but I can live with it.


----------



## Fireform (Dec 15, 2005)

Most of those guys, and many others, were busted and stripped long ago. Lance isn't uniquely persecuted--he's been uniquely excused.


----------



## spade2you (May 12, 2009)

Fireform said:


> Most of those guys, and many others, were busted and stripped long ago. Lance isn't uniquely persecuted--he's been uniquely excused.


Busted, confessed, etc what have you, they're still listed as TdF champions.


----------



## Fireform (Dec 15, 2005)

Landis and Contador were stripped. Why should Armstrong be treated more leniently? Landis was introduced to doping by Postal under Lance's control, as were many others.


----------



## spade2you (May 12, 2009)

Fireform said:


> Landis and Contador were stripped. Why should Armstrong be treated more leniently?


Why should Riis, Pantani, Ulrich, and Fignon also be treated more leniently?


----------



## Fireform (Dec 15, 2005)

I believe in most cases they don't have evidence of doping from the seasons when they won those titles. Ulrich has a lifetime ban and I believe Pantani was stripped of a Giro title. 

As far as I'm concerned, there hasn't been a legitimate grand tour winner since 1992.


----------



## spade2you (May 12, 2009)

Fireform said:


> I believe in most cases they don't have evidence of doping from the seasons when they won those titles. Ulrich has a lifetime ban and I believe Pantani was stripped of a Giro title.
> 
> As far as I'm concerned, there hasn't been a legitimate grand tour winner since 1992.


I can't view Wikipedia very well with my phone with how every Giro ended up, but they're all still listed as TdF winners.

I don't think a lifetime ban for Armstrong isn't deserved, although I honestly see little point in him not being allowed to do a marathon or triathlon.


----------



## Fireform (Dec 15, 2005)

Maybe you have an old copy of Wikipedia--mine lists Pereiro and Shleck as the winners of the 2006 and 2010 Tours. Pantani was disqualified from the 99 Giro for hct over 50.


----------



## spade2you (May 12, 2009)

Fireform said:


> Maybe you have an old copy of Wikipedia--mine lists Pereiro and Shleck as the winners of the 2006 and 2010 Tours. Pantani was disqualified from the 99 Giro for hct over 50.


I am aware of Pereiro and Schleck, but Pantani's 1998 Giro and TdF still stand, along with the rest that I mentioned. Pantani was disqualified in 99 from the Giro and couldn't compete in the TdF. I was aware of that.


----------



## RkFast (Dec 11, 2004)

Id like to see every resteraunt in the Country ban Lance and hes then forced to eat every meal at Cache Cache with that ***** of an owner sitting across from him for the rest of his days.


----------



## spade2you (May 12, 2009)

RkFast said:


> Id like to see every resteraunt in the Country ban Lance and hes then forced to eat every meal at Cache Cache with that ***** of an owner sitting across from him for the rest of his days.












You WILL eat cat poop.


----------



## Local Hero (Jul 8, 2010)

Be careful Spade, these guys mash the report button like I mash pedals in a crit. 

I don't really care about what happens to Lance Armstrong. The guy has been disgraced for years. He is old news. Nothing that happens to Armstrong will change my commute. That said, it doesn't stop me from having fun with the topic. Both on and off the forum, some guys are obsessed with Armstrong and channel their anger towards anyone who does not share their bloodlust and angst. 

This crap about Motoman the phlebotomist is the most interesting development so far. I thought the dude was a gardener/gravedigger. Now I find out that he owns a shop and Sky picks up blood bags in the Skymobile?! Holy crap.


----------



## rydbyk (Feb 17, 2010)

Lance will become a politician. That is what will "happen" to him.


----------



## 88 rex (Mar 18, 2008)

Local Hero said:


> Be careful Spade, these guys mash the report button like I mash pedals in a crit.
> 
> I don't really care about what happens to Lance Armstrong. The guy has been disgraced for years. He is old news. Nothing that happens to Armstrong will change my commute. That said, it doesn't stop me from having fun with the topic. Both on and off the forum, some guys are obsessed with Armstrong and channel their anger towards anyone who does not share their bloodlust and angst.
> 
> This crap about Motoman the phlebotomist is the most interesting development so far. I thought the dude was a gardener/gravedigger. Now I find out that he owns a shop and Sky picks up blood bags in the Skymobile?! Holy crap.


Pretty much this.:thumbsup:


----------



## MaddSkillz (Mar 13, 2007)

I'm doubtful Lance will receive his much-deserved justice. Too much corruption runs the world unchecked. Money is power and the perception is reality. Unfortunately, I think Lance still has the numbers when it comes to ignorant fan support.


----------



## cda 455 (Aug 9, 2010)

Fireform said:


> I believe in most cases they don't have evidence of doping from the seasons when they won those titles. Ulrich has a lifetime ban and I believe Pantani was stripped of a Giro title.
> 
> _*As far as I'm concerned, there hasn't been a legitimate grand tour winner since 1992.*_



Interesting point.


----------



## 88 rex (Mar 18, 2008)

cda 455 said:


> Interesting point.


What's interesting to me is where people draw their imaginary line. Cycling has had doping going on in the grand tours since their inception.


----------



## pretender (Sep 18, 2007)

88 rex said:


> What's interesting to me is where people draw their imaginary line. Cycling has had doping going on in the grand tours since their inception.


I'd say pre- and post-oxygen-vector doping is a reasonable line to draw.


----------



## Cpk (Aug 1, 2009)

RkFast said:


> Id like to see every resteraunt in the Country ban Lance and hes then forced to eat every meal at Cache Cache with that ***** of an owner sitting across from him for the rest of his days.


resteraunt, huh?!? what is that? hes, same thing, what the hell is that?!? Cache Cache, also HUH?!?

Most jibberish in one post 2012, good job!


----------



## cda 455 (Aug 9, 2010)

88 rex said:


> What's interesting to me is where people draw their imaginary line. Cycling has had doping going on in the grand tours since their inception.



I looked at Wiki history of pro cycling doping. 


Their first case listed: 1896!


----------



## jjmstang (May 8, 2009)

rydbyk said:


> Lance will become a politician. That is what will "happen" to him.


He will fit right in with those a$$hats ruining this country.....might as well get McQuaid to to be president also


----------



## Fireform (Dec 15, 2005)

pretender said:


> I'd say pre- and post-oxygen-vector doping is a reasonable line to draw.


This.


----------



## The Tedinator (Mar 12, 2004)

pretender said:


> I'd say pre- and post-oxygen-vector doping is a reasonable line to draw.


Let me know when we get to "post-oxygen-vector doping".


----------



## Kliemann53 (Jun 25, 2012)

Cpk said:


> resteraunt, huh?!? what is that? hes, same thing, what the hell is that?!? Cache Cache, also HUH?!?
> 
> Most jibberish in one post 2012, good job!


Cache Cache is a restaurant where Lance and Tyler Hamilton had a confrontation(in Hamilton's book)


----------



## JoelS (Aug 25, 2008)

Kliemann53 said:


> Cache Cache is a restaurant where Lance and Tyler Hamilton had a confrontation(in Hamilton's book)


It was reported in the cycling press when it happened. I think VeloNews and CyclingNews both carried the story.


----------



## Fireform (Dec 15, 2005)

I remember reading about it when it happened also.


----------



## curlymaple42 (Sep 13, 2012)

bayAreaDude said:


> Maybe he'll get cancer again.


Who are you, Rosanne Barr? Scum bag she is...


----------



## spade2you (May 12, 2009)

We're wanted men! I have the death sentence on 7 systems. 



Local Hero said:


> Be careful Spade


YOU'LL BE DEAD! 



Local Hero said:


> Be careful Spade, these guys mash the report button like I mash pedals in a crit.
> 
> I don't really care about what happens to Lance Armstrong. The guy has been disgraced for years. He is old news. Nothing that happens to Armstrong will change my commute. That said, it doesn't stop me from having fun with the topic. Both on and off the forum, some guys are obsessed with Armstrong and channel their anger towards anyone who does not share their bloodlust and angst.
> 
> This crap about Motoman the phlebotomist is the most interesting development so far. I thought the dude was a gardener/gravedigger. Now I find out that he owns a shop and Sky picks up blood bags in the Skymobile?! Holy crap.


OMG you mash in a crit! Reported!

On a more serious note, yes, I find the extreme Lance obsession to be about as dumb as the fatsos decked out in US Postal or Discovery gear. I simply view Lance as a guy who made for good television and I don't hesitate popping in a TdF DVD to spend hours on the rollers. He inspired me to race, but I'm aware that there's no Santa and I will continue to race because I enjoy it.


----------



## 88 rex (Mar 18, 2008)

pretender said:


> I'd say pre- and post-oxygen-vector doping is a reasonable line to draw.


Why is that a valid line? Doping is doping and on this forum there seems to be a hardline that ALL doping = scumbags of the earth. Why do some era's get a pass?


----------



## spade2you (May 12, 2009)

Chris-X said:


> Keep intentionally misrepresenting the issues and creating strawmen.
> 
> Doping is cheating, however it's been explicitly recognized on these threads that some who have cheated in professional sports are decent people and some are scumbags.
> 
> ...


Then explain to me why we aren't trying to officially strip Pantani, Riis, Ulrich, and Fignon? After all, Riis, Ulrich, and Fignon all admitted to doping. If we're trying to be fair and across the board, we wouldn't be focusing on Armstrong alone.


----------



## Samadhi (Nov 1, 2011)

*He'll go to Pro Wrestling*



JasonB176 said:


> So what’s next for Lance?


I predict that LA will sign a contract to wrestle in the WWE. They'll get Mick Folley to train him. They'll pair him with John Cena as a tag team and they'll go after the straps, big time. They'll call him Big Lance Armstrong. Women will go ape**** over him. He'll make a ****load of money, give it all to LIVESTRONG and then they'll start giving away kit istead of charging for it.



> Now that Hamilton's book has been out for about week there have to be shockwaves going through the cycling community.



I could feel those shockwaves at my house on Denver. Shocking.




> I just finished the book and it doesn’t sound for sure that he knew what to expect. Tyler was very disappointed the federal investigation was stopped but seemed reasonably optimistic that something would come out of the current charges from the USADA.


Of course he'd feel that way. TH got busted and Lance Armstrong didn't. I'd be a little put off, too.



> Lance has an amazing ability to avoid punishment by using his vast resources. Will it be a case that the USADA strips him of the titles but UCI still recognizes them?


I don't think the USADA can strip him of titles they didn't confer, but that's ok. They can pretend to strip him of his titles. That will keep the bleeting masses sated for a while.



> Will he actually have to give money back to sponsors?


If the USADA pretends to strip him of his titles, then LA can pretend to give the money back.



> Will there be any other repercussions other than him no longer being able to compete?


Who knows? If the USADA pretends to take away his titles, while they're at it maybe they'll pretend to maroon him on a desert island. Or maybe they'll pretend to execute him so that they can pretend that he's dead.



> At the very least I feel Tyler’s book is a game changer. Cyclists may keep trying to dope but the curtain has been pulled back now.


Yes, Tyler Hamilton has single-handedly changed the whole frikkin world. Now, if he can figure out how to do a Matt Lauer interview without looking like he just ate the last two quaaludes on the planet .......


----------



## Doctor Falsetti (Sep 24, 2010)

spade2you said:


> Then explain to me why we aren't trying to officially strip Pantani, Riis, Ulrich, and Fignon? After all, Riis, Ulrich, and Fignon all admitted to doping. If we're trying to be fair and across the board, we wouldn't be focusing on Armstrong alone.


Fignon, Riis are all outside of the SOL. Ulrich was sanctioned already. Pantani.....he is dead. 

But nice try to deflect from Lance:thumbsup:

If you want to ask a legit question, WTF is Kloden doing still racing?


----------



## 88 rex (Mar 18, 2008)

Chris-X said:


> Keep intentionally misrepresenting the issues and creating strawmen.
> 
> Doping is cheating, however it's been explicitly recognized on these threads that some who have cheated in professional sports are decent people and some are scumbags.
> 
> ...


How about you try answering the question, which wasn't specifically for you anyway, and quit it with the personal attacks. Your mindnumbing rambling has nothing at all do with anything I posted.


----------



## Local Hero (Jul 8, 2010)

I got bored of Chris-X's personal attacks and put him on ignore months ago. Feel free to avoid quoting him.


----------



## 88 rex (Mar 18, 2008)

Local Hero said:


> I got bored of Chris-X's personal attacks and put him on ignore months ago. Feel free to avoid quoting him.


I don't know why I removed him from the ignore list. It's impossible to have a conversation around here without him jumping in the middle and poasting nonsense that has no relation to the poast he is even quoting. 


I'm still waiting for an answer from anyone on this:

"Why is that a valid line? Doping is doping and on this forum there seems to be a hardline that ALL doping = scumbags of the earth. Why do some era's get a pass? "

I'm curious to know.


----------



## Fireform (Dec 15, 2005)

If you're so curious, why haven't you done a little forum searching? Explaining it over and over gets tedious. 

OTOH, if you're really not curious, stop pretending you are.


----------



## Doctor Falsetti (Sep 24, 2010)

88 rex said:


> I'm still waiting for an answer from anyone on this:
> 
> "Why is that a valid line? Doping is doping and on this forum there seems to be a hardline that ALL doping = scumbags of the earth. Why do some era's get a pass? "
> 
> I'm curious to know.


Perhaps because your assumption is wrong? I seldom see such absolutism here. For me doping has never been the sole measure of a person. I have good friends who doped and know a lot of douchebags who were clean


----------



## Samadhi (Nov 1, 2011)

Doctor Falsetti said:


> Perhaps because your assumption is wrong? I seldom see such absolutism here.


!!!!!

Do you actually _read_ this board?


----------



## Dwayne Barry (Feb 16, 2003)

spade2you said:


> Then explain to me why we aren't trying to officially strip Pantani, Riis, Ulrich, and Fignon? After all, Riis, Ulrich, and Fignon all admitted to doping. If we're trying to be fair and across the board, we wouldn't be focusing on Armstrong alone.


That's like saying how come everyone who gets caught stealing doesn't get their hand chopped off like in Saudi Arabia. The answer is that different organizations are involved, "crimes" have been detected at different points in time, etc.

Basically the royal "we" doesn't exist to make it fair.


----------



## Local Hero (Jul 8, 2010)

If some dopers are good people and some are bad people, what's the test for their character?


----------



## zero85ZEN (Oct 11, 2002)

Local Hero said:


> If some dopers are good people and some are bad people, what's the test for their character?


Perhaps whether or not they do everything in their power to utterly ruin anyone and everyone that has the audacity to simply ask obvious questions about, and speak to the truth about doping in cycling?

(cough/example/cough; attacking the Andreus for telling the truth under oath after being subpoenaed to testify...aaaaand need I go on?)


----------



## rydbyk (Feb 17, 2010)

*This changed things for me...*



zero85ZEN said:


> Perhaps whether or not they do everything in their power to utterly ruin anyone and everyone that has the audacity to simply ask obvious questions about, and speak to the truth about doping in cycling?
> 
> (cough/example/cough; attacking the Andreus for telling the truth under oath after being subpoenaed to testify...aaaaand need I go on?)


Lance reported Tyler after Tyler kicked Lance's butt up Ventoux. Lance essentially "told on" Tyler for being a doper by phoning the UCI.

The UCI later called Tyler into their offices (something they don't do...almost unheard of) to let Tyler know "they would be watching him closely...beware" sorta thing.

Tyler was later told that Lance did in fact tattle tale on Tyler. Tyler rode up next to Lance in the TdF peloton and yelled "F you Lance!" when Tyler was informed of what Lance had done. This apparently caused such a scene that the peloton backed away from the two of them to give them some space

To me, this is the straw that broke the camel's back. Lance is/was a total pri** as a cyclist. I don't know about his personal life though...


----------



## Local Hero (Jul 8, 2010)

Of course Lance is a _bad_ doper. 

But in the above story it sounds like Tyler's retaliatory comments to Lance enforced the omerta. It doesn't matter. Lance is a bad guy. He goes into the bad guy column of dopers. Who goes in the good guy column? Who else goes in the bad guy column? 

How can we tell?


----------



## zero85ZEN (Oct 11, 2002)

rydbyk said:


> Edited - I don't know about his personal life though...


I bet I could take a pretty good guess.


----------



## Samadhi (Nov 1, 2011)

Local Hero said:


> If some dopers are good people and some are bad people, what's the test for their character?


We should call it the "Falsetti Test".


----------



## mpre53 (Oct 25, 2011)

Local Hero said:


> If some dopers are good people and some are bad people, what's the test for their character?


I would say that diming out a former teammate for doping, when you're doped to the gills yourself, is as good a character test as any. :idea:


----------



## Local Hero (Jul 8, 2010)

Some on here have suggested that there are good dopers and that there are bad dopers. Who else is a bad guy? 



mpre53 said:


> I would say that diming out a former teammate for doping, when you're doped to the gills yourself, is as good a character test as any. :idea:


Who--aside from Armstrong--supposedly did this? If it is just Armstrong, then we cannot use it as a test. And for the sake of argument we have collectively agreed that Lance Armstrong is one of the seven princes of Hell. 


How can we tell the good guys from the bad?


----------



## mrweeje (Sep 19, 2012)

*Lance*

Sucks to be him


----------



## Doctor Falsetti (Sep 24, 2010)

Samadhi said:


> !!!!!
> 
> Do you actually _read_ this board?


Yes, but it appears you do not.


----------



## spade2you (May 12, 2009)

Doctor Falsetti said:


> Fignon, Riis are all outside of the SOL. Ulrich was sanctioned already. Pantani.....he is dead.
> 
> But nice try to deflect from Lance:thumbsup:
> 
> If you want to ask a legit question, WTF is Kloden doing still racing?


It wasn't an attempt to deflect from Lance at all. All of the riders I mentioned aren't in danger of losing their TdF titles. Hell, Big Mig should probably be a little worried if Lance gets in trouble. 

I have no problem with justice being served, but it needs to apply to more than just Lance. If it's just Lance, then there's no denying it's just a witch hunt.


----------



## Doctor Falsetti (Sep 24, 2010)

spade2you said:


> It wasn't an attempt to deflect from Lance at all. All of the riders I mentioned aren't in danger of losing their TdF titles. Hell, Big Mig should probably be a little worried if Lance gets in trouble.
> 
> I have no problem with justice being served, but it needs to apply to more than just Lance. If it's just Lance, then there's no denying it's just a witch hunt.


You are confused, it is not just a witch hunt. 

Your attempts to deflect from lance are ridiculous. Indurain never signed the WADA code. He retired years before it ever came into being. Pantani never signed it either, he died 5 months before the UCI signed it. 

Armstrong knew the rules and broke them. USADA doing their job is not a witch hunt, that is just silly.


----------



## spade2you (May 12, 2009)

Doctor Falsetti said:


> You are confused, it is not just a witch hunt.
> 
> Your attempts to deflect from lance are ridiculous. Indurain never signed the WADA code. He retired years before it ever came into being. Pantani never signed it either, he died 5 months before the UCI signed it.
> 
> Armstrong knew the rules and broke them. USADA doing their job is not a witch hunt, that is just silly.


I am not at all deflecting from Lance. Yes, you think I'm a fan boy. We get it. 

BTW, have you guys gotten his birthday banned yet? He celebrated it this year for the LAST time, eh?


----------



## eidolon (Jun 21, 2012)

> Then explain to me why we aren't trying to officially strip Pantani, Riis, Ulrich, and Fignon? After all, Riis, Ulrich, and Fignon all admitted to doping. If we're trying to be fair and across the board, we wouldn't be focusing on Armstrong alone.


If that's not an attempt to deflect attention, what is?


----------



## Doctor Falsetti (Sep 24, 2010)

spade2you said:


> I am not at all deflecting from Lance. Yes, you think I'm a fan boy. We get it.
> 
> BTW, have you guys gotten his birthday banned yet? He celebrated it this year for the LAST time, eh?


You are not making sense

Armstrong signed the WADA code multiple times. The key parts of the code were written by his long time attorney/agent Bill Stapleton. How is sanctioning him based on it a witch hunt? They have over a dozen witnesses, should they ignore this? 

Why are you so willing to go after riders who never signed the WADA code but ignore the guy who did? :idea: Most see THAT as a witch hunt


----------



## Samadhi (Nov 1, 2011)

Doctor Falsetti said:


> You are not making sense


You can't tell when your position is being held up for ridicule?


----------



## SicBith (Jan 21, 2008)

Doctor Falsetti said:


> You are not making sense
> 
> Armstrong signed the WADA code multiple times. The key parts of the code were written by his long time attorney/agent Bill Stapleton. How is sanctioning him based on it a witch hunt? They have over a dozen witnesses, should they ignore this?
> 
> Why are you so willing to go after riders who never signed the WADA code but ignore the guy who did? :idea: Most see THAT as a witch hunt


What about taking all results from Floyd, Tyler, Levi, Geo, CVV, DZ, JV and all the other riders who were a part of the LA circle of friends who testified at the grand jury? All these guys signed the code, but only LA is stripped of all his results. I don't care who you are that smells like something DF would say is not a witch hunt. 
What about other guys Tyler outted in his book? Is WADA going to investigate every one of them. They should at least retro test these guy's samples. Going after LA for the crap he pulled before the comeback was a bad idea due to the presumption that if you go after him, you need to go after everyone else who pops up on the radar because of his investigation. They should have focused on the comeback years 2009, 2010 biopassport failures. Throw their resources at those two years to let any doubters out there know he was dirty. This would also let the guys in the current peloton (who already know who has and does dope) that no one is above the laws of the new peloton. This is truly a **** show now, and though I'm sure he is ego is crushed he certainly is not letting it show on the outside as he continues to race and push Livestrong whenever he can. (aw shucks...I guess all those haters are still haters) Though they got their white whale, in mind my USADA = Fail on this one.


----------



## Big-foot (Dec 14, 2002)

SicBith said:


> What about taking all results from Floyd, Tyler, Levi, Geo, CVV, DZ, JV and all the other riders who were a part of the LA circle of friends who testified at the grand jury? All these guys signed the code, but only LA is stripped of all his results. I don't care who you are that smells like something DF would say is not a witch hunt.
> What about other guys Tyler outted in his book? Is WADA going to investigate every one of them. They should at least retro test these guy's samples. Going after LA for the crap he pulled before the comeback was a bad idea due to the presumption that if you go after him, you need to go after everyone else who pops up on the radar because of his investigation. They should have focused on the comeback years 2009, 2010 biopassport failures. Throw their resources at those two years to let any doubters out there know he was dirty. This would also let the guys in the current peloton (who already know who has and does dope) that no one is above the laws of the new peloton. This is truly a **** show now, and though I'm sure he is ego is crushed he certainly is not letting it show on the outside as he continues to race and push Livestrong whenever he can. (aw shucks...I guess all those haters are still haters) Though they got their white whale, in mind my USADA = Fail on this one.




The difference between Lance and the others are items 3 through 5.
The anti-doping rule violations for which Mr. Armstrong is being sanctioned are: 

(1) Use and/or attempted use of prohibited substances and/or methods including EPO, blood transfusions, testosterone, corticosteroids and masking agents.

(2) Possession of prohibited substances and/or methods including EPO, blood transfusions and related equipment (such as needles, blood bags, storage containers and other transfusion equipment and blood parameters measuring devices), testosterone, corticosteroids and masking agents.

(3) Trafficking of EPO, testosterone, and corticosteroids.

(4) Administration and/or attempted administration to others of EPO, testosterone, and cortisone.

(5) Assisting, encouraging, aiding, abetting, covering up and other complicity involving one or more anti-doping rule violations and/or attempted anti-doping rule violations.


----------



## rydbyk (Feb 17, 2010)

Big-foot said:


> The difference between Lance and the others are items 3 through 5.
> The anti-doping rule violations for which Mr. Armstrong is being sanctioned are:
> 
> (1) Use and/or attempted use of prohibited substances and/or methods including EPO, blood transfusions, testosterone, corticosteroids and masking agents.
> ...


I can see a bit of both sides here regarding the "witch hunt". Parts of items 3,4 and 5 actually most likely do apply to other Posties and riders connected to LA. Yes, perhaps to a lesser degree, but still....

I will take a wild guess that at some point in those ten or so years that someone other than LA trafficked PEDs, helped administer some sort of illegal "treatment" to a teammate, was involved in some sort of cover-up etc etc etc..

What makes LA such a BIG target imo is that he took the above to a whole new level and was arrogant about it...almost challenging authorities to bring it on. Typical Lance. Lance has failed to realize that there are big shot attorneys etc that don't take kindly to this behaviour/attitude and are also very competitive in nature.

Lance was also a bully. Nobody likes a bully. People fear the bully, yet often silently wait in the shadows for the fall...looks like that time has come.

Ego is a powerful force. I feel that the attorneys see Lance's "F you all/I am untouchable" as a challenge.

Game on!

.02


----------



## SicBith (Jan 21, 2008)

Big-foot said:


> The difference between Lance and the others are items 3 through 5.
> The anti-doping rule violations for which Mr. Armstrong is being sanctioned are:
> 
> (1) Use and/or attempted use of prohibited substances and/or methods including EPO, blood transfusions, testosterone, corticosteroids and masking agents.
> ...


So it is shown that all those guys testified to LA dealing them EPO? LA never just gave it to them? It sounds more like Ferrari and Fuentes were doing the trafficking, not LA. Do the math. #3 is questionable, they and 98% of the other guys doping are all guilty of #4 and #5.


----------



## Doctor Falsetti (Sep 24, 2010)

SicBith said:


> What about taking all results from Floyd, Tyler, Levi, Geo, CVV, DZ, JV and all the other riders who were a part of the LA circle of friends who testified at the grand jury? All these guys signed the code, but only LA is stripped of all his results. I don't care who you are that smells like something DF would say is not a witch hunt.


Lance was offered the same deal, he turned it down. He chose to continue to lie and stand with his co-conspirators and fight it using behind the scenes maneuvering. Stupid move. He could have exposed the UCI, the doctors and directors who pushed and enabled dopers for years.


----------



## Doctor Falsetti (Sep 24, 2010)

SicBith said:


> So it is shown that all those guys testified to LA dealing them EPO? LA never just gave it to them? It sounds more like Ferrari and Fuentes were doing the trafficking, not LA. Do the math. #3 is questionable, they and 98% of the other guys doping are all guilty of #4 and #5.


The guy who drove the drugs and blood around France was Lance's gardener. Just a coincidence of course:thumbsup:


----------



## SicBith (Jan 21, 2008)

Doctor Falsetti said:


> Lance was offered the same deal, he turned it down. He chose to continue to lie and stand with his co-conspirators and fight it using behind the scenes maneuvering. Stupid move. He could have exposed the UCI, the doctors and directors who pushed and enabled dopers for years.


You're still not making any sense.

If LA did just what any one of his teammates did and tell USADA that he did indeed use PEDs, and that he was involved in sharing PEDs with other teammates USADA would say ok. You know what... keep on racing... no worries. Your name will be kept out of this as long as you don't say anything we won't either. Don't worry about your PEDs assisted victories either you're all good with those. LA did not get the same deal as the others because USADA was going after him, not the other guys. 

Unless you can come up with a creditable source showing LA was indeed offered the same deal as the other guys the rumor and lies just keep flowing off someone's keyboard.


----------



## SicBith (Jan 21, 2008)

Doctor Falsetti said:


> The guy who drove the drugs and blood around France was Lance's gardener. Just a coincidence of course:thumbsup:


Still not making sense

So maybe he was the dealer and not LA? I'm pretty sure my neighbor's gardener deals weed, but I can't really call him a dealer until I buy something from him can I? Until it is proven that LA gave him the blood and drugs and paid him to drive around France and not Del Moro or JB or another Postal employee it is just that, coincidence.


----------



## Doctor Falsetti (Sep 24, 2010)

SicBith said:


> You're still not making any sense.
> 
> If LA did just what any one of his teammates did and tell USADA that he did indeed use PEDs, and that he was involved in sharing PEDs with other teammates USADA would say ok. You know what... keep on racing... no worries. Your name will be kept out of this as long as you don't say anything we won't either. Don't worry about your PEDs assisted victories either you're all good with those. LA did not get the same deal as the others because USADA was going after him, not the other guys.
> 
> Unless you can come up with a creditable source showing LA was indeed offered the same deal as the other guys the rumor and lies just keep flowing off someone's keyboard.


I am making perfect sense, you just chose not to understand. You are also assuming that everyone participation was the same, timing with the same, and sanction was the same. You are assuming that those who talked will get zero sanction

you are wrong


----------



## Fireform (Dec 15, 2005)

Why don't you just read the book yourself instead of pestering us to explain it all to you point by point?

Postal was doping with T and EPO already. After the Festina scandal the drugs and apparatus had to be moved out of the team vehicle and they started to rely on on-demand deliveries by motorcycle instead. And Lance set it all up.


----------



## SicBith (Jan 21, 2008)

Doctor Falsetti said:


> I am making perfect sense, you just chose not to understand. You are also assuming that everyone participation was the same, timing with the same, and sanction was the same. You are assuming that those who talked will get zero sanction
> 
> you are wrong



I believe your definition of "making sense" is off, and I believe my understanding of this is very clear. You said they they were offered the same deal meaning whatever their level of participation, timing, and sanction doesn't matter if they were all offered the same deal. Levi, George, CVV, JV, DZ all continued to ride. As USADA has yet to release any info on this your entire argument is based on rumor you are assuming they were all offer the same deal and you as I are assuming what the sanctions, if any are handed down to those who are not the focus of the investigation, will be.

lying is wrong DF, I am not.


----------



## Doctor Falsetti (Sep 24, 2010)

SicBith said:


> I believe your definition of "making sense" is off, and I believe my understanding of this is very clear. You said they they were offered the same deal meaning whatever their level of participation, timing, and sanction doesn't matter if they were all offered the same deal. Levi, George, CVV, JV, DZ all continued to ride. As USADA has yet to release any info on this your entire argument is based on rumor you are assuming they were all offer the same deal and you as I are assuming what the sanctions, if any are handed down to those who are not the focus of the investigation, will be.
> 
> lying is wrong DF, I am not.


Lance was offered a deal of a reduced sanction if he co-operated. He chose to obstruct. 

I agree, Armstrong's participation in the over a decade long organized doping program was greater then the other riders. He approved it, helped organize it. It was good of USADA to still offer him a deal. Some may disagree but ultimately dismantling this infrastructure and exposing the corruption of the UCI and USAC makes it worth it


----------



## SicBith (Jan 21, 2008)

Fireform said:


> Why don't you just read the book yourself instead of pestering us to explain it all to you point by point?
> 
> Postal was doping with T and EPO already. After the Festina scandal the drugs and apparatus had to be moved out of the team vehicle and they started to rely on on-demand deliveries by motorcycle instead. And Lance set it all up.


I've read the book. Happy meal.


----------



## Fireform (Dec 15, 2005)

Then you need to work on reading comprehension.


----------



## SicBith (Jan 21, 2008)

Doctor Falsetti said:


> Lance was offered a deal of a reduced sanction if he co-operated. He chose to obstruct.
> 
> I agree, Armstrong's participation in the over a decade long organized doping program was greater then the other riders. He approved it, helped organize it. It was good of USADA to still offer him a deal. Some may disagree but ultimately dismantling this infrastructure and exposing the corruption of the UCI and USAC makes it worth it


Bringing us back around to my original point. As USADA has banned Ferrari for this, they in the interest of fairness should look at all of his clients (teams or athletes). USADA/WADA should also look at Fuentes and his team or athlete clients list Basically anyone who signed the code and was named in this investigation should have their samples retro tested. Current team owners/managers who have participated in team organized doping should be banned. It is all a **itshow of which I don't believe needed to be taken on in order to better cycling today. LA still has his $, the statements made by Tyler in his book will buffer the blow of the USADA report is that ever becomes public. Topping it all off is many cycling fans are either so bummed that they just don't care anymore or after this years TOF some actually prefer the competition during LA's tours. Tragic.


----------



## Doctor Falsetti (Sep 24, 2010)

SicBith said:


> Bringing us back around to my original point. As USADA has banned Ferrari for this, they in the interest of fairness should look at all of his clients (teams or athletes). USADA/WADA should also look at Fuentes and his team or athlete clients list Basically anyone who signed the code and was named in this investigation should have their samples retro tested.


It appears you only follow Lance related news

You must have missed that CONI is currently investigating Ferrari. They have tied him to over 70 athletes, bugged his camper, traced the cash. The Mantova Case goes to trial in November. 

Some cases were not successful as they did not have the mountain of evidence USADA had. (Humanaplasma) 

I agree on Puerto it is a mess and was ignored by the UCI and Spain for a long time. Some riders were sanctioned, Ulrich, Scarponi, Basso, Valverde, but many escaped. 

It comes to court early next year
Operacion Puerto Trial To Finally Begin In January | Cyclingnews.com


----------



## spade2you (May 12, 2009)

Doctor Falsetti said:


> You are not making sense
> 
> Armstrong signed the WADA code multiple times. The key parts of the code were written by his long time attorney/agent Bill Stapleton. How is sanctioning him based on it a witch hunt? They have over a dozen witnesses, should they ignore this?
> 
> Why are you so willing to go after riders who never signed the WADA code but ignore the guy who did? :idea: Most see THAT as a witch hunt


So the fact that Armstrong signed a piece of paper made him wrong, yet all of the other riders were OK because they didn't sign a paper. It all makes sense now.


----------



## Doctor Falsetti (Sep 24, 2010)

spade2you said:


> So the fact that Armstrong signed a piece of paper made him wrong, yet all of the other riders were OK because they didn't sign a paper. It all makes sense now.


and you are concerned about witch hunts? :idea:


----------



## spade2you (May 12, 2009)

Chris-X said:


> You're joking, right? I mean you really can't be serious with this piffle?:idea:


No I am not. I deeply appreciate the Dope Dwellers confirming that this isn't about integrity or honesty, just bustin' Lance. Feel free to argue that this isn't a witch hunt, but only the Lance Haters can find something. After all, if they worked out as much as they spent on Lance, they might be as fast as Lance without any performance enhancers.


----------



## asgelle (Apr 21, 2003)

spade2you said:


> No I am not.


Where's the $25.00 you owe me for posting here. I have a contract (signed by me) that says everyone who posts must pay me $25.00. You haven't paid. Now don't go saying you never agreed to that.


----------



## JasonB176 (Aug 18, 2011)

Samadhi said:


> I predict that LA will sign a contract to wrestle in the WWE. They'll get Mick Folley to train him. They'll pair him with John Cena as a tag team and they'll go after the straps, big time. They'll call him Big Lance Armstrong. Women will go ape**** over him. He'll make a ****load of money, give it all to LIVESTRONG and then they'll start giving away kit istead of charging for it.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I'm impressed you took the time to pick apart my post considering that you didn't reply with a single word that wasn't sarcastic. The rest of this thread has been interesting.


----------



## The Tedinator (Mar 12, 2004)

So, are they stripping LA of all his results since 98 because of doping violations, or because he obstructed the investigation? If it is doping, then they should strip even the guys who did testify. If it is because he obstructed; whence comes the authority to do this?

Let me be clear. LA doped, trafficked, facilitated, etc. I believe Hamilton's book is the truth. I also believe that USADA would have banned him for life, and stripped him of his titles even if he sang like a canary. He is just too big a target and to juicy of a trophy not to. On this I will just have to disagree with the good Doctor.


----------



## trailrunner68 (Apr 23, 2011)

I think if he would have dealt then he could have gotten away with losing 2004 and 2005 plus a short ban. Publicly Armstrong has dug the hole so deep that he has to continue to lie. Plus there is potential legal exposure if he admits, so again he has to continue lying. He has painted himself into a corner. Over time his lying will look more and more ludicrous.

He will end up like Pete Rose.


----------



## Samadhi (Nov 1, 2011)

JasonB176 said:


> I'm impressed you took the time to pick apart my post considering that you didn't reply with a single word that wasn't sarcastic. The rest of this thread has been interesting.


It was only partially sarcastic. 

The first bit about pro wrestling ... ok I was being a bit silly .... but he'd make a good show in the pro ranks especially if they teamed him with a playah like Cena. LA could do a face trun and pull a screwjob on Cena and you'd have a push that would last for a year. Good money for all involved.

My view on Hamilton is spot on. He's pissed because LA made millions and is all famous and **** and most people don't care about his doping. Hamilton isn't widely known, didn't make millions, is in disgrace and when he does Matt Lauer interviews looks like he ate the last two Quaaludes on the planet. I'd be bitter. I might even write a book condemning LA too.


The rest? Yes, biting sarcasm. After a while the whole LA things around here seems so absurd, you can't help but get a little sarcastic.


----------



## Doctor Falsetti (Sep 24, 2010)

Samadhi said:


> My view on Hamilton is spot on. He's pissed because LA made millions and is all famous and **** and most people don't care about his doping. Hamilton isn't widely known, didn't make millions, is in disgrace and when he does Matt Lauer interviews looks like he ate the last two Quaaludes on the planet. I'd be bitter. I might even write a book condemning LA too.


Why would Tyler be jealous of Lance? He has been exposed as a fraud, he is an international joke. Tyler lives a happy life, with a bestselling book, and a great wife.....while Lance rapidly sinks into irrelevance. 

I would rather be in Tyler's shoes


----------



## Samadhi (Nov 1, 2011)

Doctor Falsetti said:


> Why would Tyler be jealous of Lance?


because LA made piles of money riding a bike and Hamilton did not



> He has been exposed as a fraud, he is an international joke.


No, just you and some of your friends think he's a fraud and a joke. 




> Tyler lives a happy life,


If he's so frikken happy why did he right the book? 




> with a bestselling book,


Lots of people write best-selling books and Hamilton didn't actually wroite the one he has. What really counts with best-seller lists is who's list you're on and how long you stay there. Another indicator is how many copies of a "best seller" end up in the stacks at used bookstores. We'll have to wait and see.



> and a great wife.....


Good for him.



> while Lance rapidly sinks into irrelevance.


All of our sports champions eventually become irrelevant. All people like LA can give us is championships. The lasting impact of a racer is often very limited. technological advances have more of a lasting effect and retain their relevance.

Whether or not he cheated isn't this issue. Getting caught is the issue. Disappointing the fans is the issue.

Everybody loved Micky Mantle until they found out he was a drunk.

Everyone loved Johnny Unitias until he was Broke.

Lenny Dykstra was everyone's favorite (a Bob Roll with a bat and glove) until he went to jail.

Pete Rose was a hero until it was revealed he had been gambling.

Some, however, gain lasting fame and fortune.

Michael Schumacher is the Ty Cobb of Forumla One. A hard, aggressive, immensly talented, but often dirty and underhanded driver. At his peak, he was the highest paid athelete in the world - 50 million + (not including endorsements) a year to show up at the track on Thursday and drive for a few hours. 7 championships and still considered the greatest driver of them all.

Eddie Mercks became a Baron.

Marco Pantani has statues erected in his honor.

None of them are really relevant today, but not because they cheated or were "dirty". They're irrelevant because the sport has moved on and left them behind.

It's just the way of things.

What's really sad is we demand the kind of excellence these fallen heros provide us and when they fall from that pedestal we put them on, we decend on them like a pack of ravenous dogs.

Its sad and it's sick and is so typically human.

So doc, while I find you position laughable and even pathetic, it's really not your fault. You're just being human.



> I would rather be in Tyler's shoes


Go get ' em Tiger!

And remember - Marco Pantani died for your sins.


----------



## Fireform (Dec 15, 2005)

Samadhi said:


> And remember - Marco Pantani died for your sins.


Possibly the most stupid, offensive thing I've seen posted this week. Top three, anyway.


----------



## Samadhi (Nov 1, 2011)

Fireform said:


> Possibly the most stupid, offensive thing I've seen posted this week. Top three, anyway.


Really, why? I'm curious to know.


----------



## Doctor Falsetti (Sep 24, 2010)

Samadhi said:


> because LA made piles of money riding a bike .


And that is really all that matters?

If you make piles of money but spend it all on legal fees and settlements did you ever really make it?


----------



## Samadhi (Nov 1, 2011)

Doctor Falsetti said:


> And that is really all that matters?


If you're a professional, yes. Professionals are people who make a living at whatever it is they do. A professional bike racer makes a living racing bikes. he/she get PAID to do this and that's all they do.



> If you make piles of money but spend it all on legal fees and settlements did you ever really make it?


Depends on how much money you have to begin with.

Do you have access to LAs personal finances info and his legal bills? What settlments has he made? These are generally private matters and it's highly unlikely you have the information.

Although money probably had something to do with LA throwing in the towel. What can they do to him really? Why fight it? The outcome was a forgone conclusion - and that's not to say he was actually guilty of anything (opinion doesn't matter) - they were gonna bend him over regardless. It wouldn't change anything or anyone's minds. Fighting it would have been thowing good money after bad. So why do it? Why waste the time and the money and the headache. Betting on the impotence of the USADA has proved to be a good one. Were it me, I probably would have done the same thing.


----------



## Doctor Falsetti (Sep 24, 2010)

Samadhi said:


> I Betting on the impotence of the USADA has proved to be a good one.


Really? Getting stripped of all his Tour and being exposed to multiple legal entanglements was a good bet?


----------



## Samadhi (Nov 1, 2011)

Doctor Falsetti said:


> Really? Getting stripped of all his Tour and being exposed to multiple legal entanglements was a good bet?


He hasn't been stripped of anything, yet.

People with lots of money and business interests always face legal entanglements.


----------



## Doctor Falsetti (Sep 24, 2010)

Samadhi said:


> People with lots of money and business interests always face legal entanglements.


So do criminals


----------



## Local Hero (Jul 8, 2010)

Speaking of pirates...


----------

