# LA Confidential Download



## Steve-O (Jan 28, 2004)

Here are sections of the English language version for download.

http://eposino.com/yabb/Attachments/BigTex_Pages_101-150.pdf

Interesting bedtime reading about Mr. Armstrong...


----------



## blackhat (Jan 2, 2003)

nice, thanks. this should keep me entertained for awhile. now I just need the rest of it.


----------



## fast_twitch (Jul 4, 2006)

blackhat said:


> nice, thanks. this should keep me entertained for awhile. now I just need the rest of it.


The first 150 pages are there. Just go to http://eposino.com/yabb/YaBB.pl and type "Big Tex" in the search bar. While you're there you can do a little shopping! Check out their home page http://eposino.com/ for a package of redijects....


----------



## texass4 (Oct 13, 2005)

Is that purely a doping forum??

Not trying to be a rainy day here, but it's hard for me to put much stock in a scan, of a rough copy, of a translation, of an excerpt, of a book, from an unofficial source. Just looking at that PDF reminds me of the telephone game we used to play as kids where the same whispered phrase would be repeated and distorted over and over until the original thought was lost completely.

I think I'll wait to either learn French or to obtain an authorized FULL translation before even thinking of forming an opinion.


----------



## fast_twitch (Jul 4, 2006)

Yeah...it's pretty much a doping forum and the hosting site http://eposino.com/ seems to be a supplier of epo. The forum is supposedly to "help keep users safe" when they decide to go to HCT=60.

Believe it or not, there are worse forums with an even bigger anabolic/PED slant.


----------



## rodster (Jun 29, 2006)

texass4 said:


> Is that purely a doping forum??
> 
> Not trying to be a rainy day here, but it's hard for me to put much stock in a scan, of a rough copy, of a translation, of an excerpt, of a book, from an unofficial source. Just looking at that PDF reminds me of the telephone game we used to play as kids where the same whispered phrase would be repeated and distorted over and over until the original thought was lost completely.
> 
> I think I'll wait to either learn French or to obtain an authorized FULL translation before even thinking of forming an opinion.


It doesn't read like a translation. 

There wasn't anything in what I read that I haven't heard before other than the discussion wondering why LA's cancer wasn't detected via doping control tests performed during the 96 season.


----------



## stevesbike (Jun 3, 2002)

maybe these guys couldn't get published in the US because 1) they don't have much evidence, 2) their writing sucks. Re 1) it's the old prosecution strategy that if you don't have a smoking gun you try to pile up as much suggestive evidence as possible, hoping somehow people will think that the accumulation of crappy evidence somehow transforms into a solid case. Re 2, could they write in a less engaging way? Personally, I think there's probably a good case out there somewhere, but this isn't it...


----------



## CARBON110 (Apr 17, 2002)

French prosecutor shelves case against Armstrong

French prosecutor Philippe Drouet of the court in Annecy has shelved the doping case against American Lance Armstrong. The case, dating back to January 2005, involved certain allegations made against the Tour de France champion in the published book LA Confidentiel, les secrets de Lance Armstrong, co-written by sportswriter David Walsh and former L'Equipe cycling writer Pierre Ballester.

Key witness in the case was Dr. Benoît Nave, a former Volvo-Cannondale Mountain Bike Racing team doctor who treated Armstrong for his back injuries following his bad crash in the 2003 Dauphiné Libéré.

"I have worked on several occasions with Lance Armstrong since October 2002," Nave told L'Equipe in January 2005. "At that time he had already won the Tour four times. We met in San Francisco and he had a nutritional consultation. So there is nothing to hide in all this, and it is always interesting for me to work with people like Armstrong."

According to AGR, after hearing Nave, prosecutor Drouet ruled that there are "no grounds to

for you anal wackos out there, I COPIED AND PASTED THIS FROM CYCLINGNEWS.COM


----------



## Dwayne Barry (Feb 16, 2003)

stevesbike said:


> Personally, I think there's probably a good case out there somewhere, but this isn't it...


Try the multiple samples from the '99 tour that appeared to have exogenous EPO in them. Or his corticosteroid "positive". Or his former team mates and coworkers who have spilled the beans.


----------



## CARBON110 (Apr 17, 2002)

Dwayne! How are you?

I don't know the story behind the 99 samples so maybe someone can fill me in - for instance, when did they become positives? How come nothing was done? 

Guilt by association because his team8s said he did it and they did it? come on.....

I am not saying he didn't do it, just waiting for some EVIDENCE! 

He is still clean to me until they find something real - now can I imagin that LA came back from cancer and said to himself - those guys are doping and I am going to have to dope to beat them? Maybe, sounds kind of stupid (since he is anything but dumb) after surviving cancer but hey, who knows


----------



## blackhat (Jan 2, 2003)

CARBON110 said:


> I am not saying he didn't do it, just waiting for some EVIDENCE!


yeah, <i>that's</i> what's missing from the LA doping affair. if only there was some evidence somewhere.


----------



## CARBON110 (Apr 17, 2002)

lol!!!!


----------



## Dwayne Barry (Feb 16, 2003)

CARBON110 said:


> now can I imagin that LA came back from cancer and said to himself - those guys are doping and I am going to have to dope to beat them?


I really doubt the first time he decided to dope was post-cancer.


----------



## Dwayne Barry (Feb 16, 2003)

CARBON110 said:


> I don't know the story behind the 99 samples so maybe someone can fill me in - for instance, when did they become positives? How come nothing was done?


I can't, it is far too long and involved. They will never be "positives" as the proper protocols were not followed to declare them as such since the samples were tested retroactively for research purposes. Nonetheless, it doesn't change the facts that 6 of his 17 samples from the '99 tour were "positive" based on the criteria for exogenous EPO doping.


----------



## Trek_envy (Jun 15, 2004)

*High Kwality writing in there...*

My personal favorite is:

"Armstrong won the 2000 tour for the second time...."

I know its a translation, but please.


----------



## CARBON110 (Apr 17, 2002)

how come nothing was done then?


----------



## Dwayne Barry (Feb 16, 2003)

CARBON110 said:


> how come nothing was done then?


You've really not been following this at all have you? I thought you were just yanking my chain with the previous post.

To declare a positive doping test there is a certain protocol that must be followed. Not the least of which is there must be both a positive A & B sample. In Armstrong's case (and Zulle, Beltran, etc. who also had postive samples) only one sample was tested as it was done for research purposes to see if EPO doping had decreased from the '98 to '99 Tour (in the wake of the Festina scandal) and to see if technically they could detect EPO in urine that had been frozen for a number of years. The only reason we ever found out was because the lab inappropriately attached the sample numbers to their findings and a reporter tricked Lance into giving him access to his medical records so that the reporter had the code numbers to his testing samples. Thus we found out a number of the positive EPO findings were Armstrong's samples.


----------

