Lance Armstrong calls it quits in fight against doping charges

[Josef Svejk]

Am I the only one who doesn't really give a shit? He still had to ride the fucking thing. And nobody can really say it wasn't a level playing field when every other fucker was juiced up to the eyeballs too.

 

Maybe because I never ever saw cycling as a clean sport in the first place.

 

It would be a level playing field if (a) every cyclist was cheating (which, in fact, they weren't) and (b) every cyclist who was cheating had access to the same means of cheating (which, in fact, they didn't).

 

But even assuming that you're right about the level playing field (which you're not), there's more to the Armstrong scandal than cheating or cheating successfully. (He certainly wasn't the only cheat or only successful cheat, even if he was the most successful cheat.) The story is really about the culture of intimidation (of other cyclists, their family members, and sceptical journalists) and the culture of silence (of the relevant authorities).

 

Armstrong bullied pretty much everyone who challenged him, and could do so as a massively wealthy American superstar, cancer-survivor, and charity-hero. He also paid off the relevant authorities, and could do so for the same reasons. That's the fucking scandal. The sport of cycling was rotten. And Armstrong was a major cause of that (though certainly not the sole cause).

[L19red]

Its all gone a bit pear shaped.

 

Nike say

"Due to the seemingly insurmountable evidence that Lance Armstrong participated in doping and misled Nike for more than a decade, it is with great sadness that we have terminated our contract with him. Nike does not condone the use of illegal performance enhancing drugs in any manner.

 

Nike plans to continue support of the Livestrong initiatives created to unite, inspire and empower people affected by cancer."

 

Livestrong says

Lance Armstrong stepping down as chairman of his Livestrong cancer charity

"Lance Armstrong said Wednesday he is stepping down as chairman of his Livestrong cancer-fighting charity so the group can focus on its mission instead of its founder's problems."

[silverlining]

LieStrong

[L19red]

LieStrong

 

livewrong

[kelster]

Am I the only one who doesn't really give a shit? He still had to ride the fucking thing. And nobody can really say it wasn't a level playing field when every other fucker was juiced up to the eyeballs too.

 

Maybe because I never ever saw cycling as a clean sport in the first place.

 

You're wrong, and by a long way too. When the UCI didn't have a test for EPO, they instituted a fudge saying that a cyclist must have a hematocrit level below 50%. Naturally occurring levels are around 45%. If a cyclist had a natural level of 48%, then they would get almost no benefit from taking EPO unless they broke the rules. Armstrong (as well as Tyler Hamilton who's book gives a fuller explanation) have natural level of about 42%, so he was able to benefit more than most.

 

Add to that the fact that Lance was paying testers off, had advanced warning of tests and the money to pay for the best doctors and testing equipment, then you'll find it was a very unlevel playing field.

[Bobby Hundreds]

I met him when he said he was on an 8 week cycle I thought it was a long distance race.

 

Try the veal.

[Clark Westerfeld]

Cycling: Nike deny $500,000 Lance Armstrong cover-up payment

 

Nike issued a denial last night to the extraordinary claim that it paid $500,000 (£300,000) for a failed drugs test from Lance Armstrong to be covered up.

 

Amid a growing backlash against the sportswear giant over its refusal to cut its ties with Armstrong, testimony that it had the money placed into a Swiss bank account belonging to former UCI president Hein Verbruggen re-emerged in a 2006 deposition from Kathy Lemond, the wife of Armstrong's compatriot cyclist Greg Lemond. The claim, which Lemond stood by in an interview with the New York Daily News, is that the cash was paid to cover up a positive test in 1999 for corticosteroids, which Armstrong had used to treat saddle sores.

 

Nike would not engage in discussion on the claim last night – instead issuing a 42-word statement. "In response to the offensive allegations in today's New York Daily News, Nike vehemently denies that it paid former UCI president Hein Verbruggen $500,000 to cover up a positive drug test," the statement read. "Nike does not condone the use of illegal performance enhancing drugs."

 

Lemond's claim surfaced during the legal case in which Armstrong and Tailwind Sports – the company which runs his cycling team – filed a lawsuit against SCA, a Dallas firm that indemnifies sponsors who offer prizes based on athletic achievements. SCA refused to pay Armstrong a $5m bonus that Tailwind had promised the cyclist for winning the 2004 Tour de France after allegations of doping reported in the book by Sunday Times journalist David Walsh and Pierre Ballester – LA Confidential – the Secrets of Lance Armstrong. It was in a 2006 deposition over the suit, that Lemond testified that Julian Devries, who worked as a mechanic for Armstrong's team, told her that Nike and Thom Weisel, a banker who sponsored Armstrong's team, paid the money into Verbruggen's account.

 

Lemond told the Daily News that she stood by her testimony. She said: "I'm sure Julian was telling the truth."

 

Armstrong's lawyer Mark Fabiani responded with a strong personal attack on Lemond. "We have absolutely no idea what Mrs Lemond, a long-time Lance-hater, was talking about when she gave her deposition. And to this day we have no idea what she was talking about," he said.

 

Armstrong's years of drug-taking was revealed last week in the United States Anti-Doping Agency's report into his alleged doping in the US Postal team. Nike have shown no signs of hardening their stance on Armstrong and, amid protests in the US, have only reissued a statement from August relating to the seven-times Tour de France winner. "We are saddened that Lance Armstrong may no longer be able to participate in certain competitions and his titles appear to be impacted," that statement read. "Lance has stated his innocence and has been unwavering on this position. Nike plans to continue to support Lance and the Lance Armstrong Foundation."

 

Lemond's Twitter account yesterday revealed her attempts to generate support for a protest against Nike's stance, planned for the company's corporate headquarters in Beaverton, Oregon.

 

American rider Levi Leipheimer has been sacked by Omega Pharma-QuickStep after admitting to doping while a team-mate of Armstrong.

[L19red]

According to the ever reliable @theraceradio the rest of Lance's sponsors are ditching him too, so far confirmed exits from Nike, RadioShack, Giro (helmets) Anhauser Busch and Trek. Only Oakley left to pull the plug.

 

[RoboRiise]

You're wrong, and by a long way too. When the UCI didn't have a test for EPO, they instituted a fudge saying that a cyclist must have a hematocrit level below 50%. Naturally occurring levels are around 45%. If a cyclist had a natural level of 48%, then they would get almost no benefit from taking EPO unless they broke the rules. Armstrong (as well as Tyler Hamilton who's book gives a fuller explanation) have natural level of about 42%, so he was able to benefit more than most.

 

 

Kudos for that, I was about to write a typically long-winded and detailed post about the utter myth that 'everybody was doing it' somehow resulted in a level playing field with regard to oxygen vector doping when the exact opposite is true but you summarised it well there.

 

It's certainly true to say that during the 'EPO era' cyclists felt that they had to jump onboard if they wanted a hope of a top ten GC finish in any of the grand tours or a shot at the podium in the classics but it wasn't so much because they felt they'd be on a level playing field; rather that the overall speed of races when the peloton was filled with EPO fueled riders was such that without it, even a talented rider would be shelled out of the back in pretty much every stage or race. It was more about simply holding on which is why it wasn't just the team leaders doing EPO, it was everyone.

 

EPO and oxygen vector doping in general was a complete gamechanger for cycling because the benefits of it in terms of performance increase in an endurance sport are simply ridiculous, way more than any other form of doping. Before that, steroids of varying flavours were the doping method of choice for pretty much any sport but they're only so much use in cycling because the only discipline that putting on muscle mass is of any significant help with is track sprinting.*

 

Raw power on its own is of very little use in road cycling especially in a three week grand tour; even sprinters like Cavendish are only 'big' compared to the rest of the peloton. For potential tour winners, the really important measures are a cyclists power to weight ratio and their ability to produce a sustained power output which is at, or near to their maximum. By using EPO or transfusions, both of which allow the blood to carry more oxygen to the muscles, both power outputs and endurance increased hugely with no corresponding weight gain from increased muscle mass.

 

Some of the performances from that era were simply ludicrous (Pantani and Armstrong riding up Ventoux like they were on fucking motorbikes in 2000 springs to mind) and with teams needing ranking points to keep their presence at the big races and give the sponsors exposure, there was huge pressure on cyclists to join the club.

 

Some of them had the backbone to walk away after facing a choice that they should never have been forced to make to begin with and the real shame here is that having done that, that their names aren't anything like as well known as the likes of Armstrong. Nobody with half a brain and an even passing interest in, or knowledge of cycling can have seriously believed that Armstrong was riding clean for years now, which is why his continued denials show him up for the complete twat that he is.

 

The tide is definitely turning against him now though. I was amazed to hear today that Nike have dropped him especially after that embarrassing press release they did a week ago when the report was first published and if they've bailed out, I think it's a clear sign that he's going to find himself in a very lonely place in the coming months. That's especially true when you bear in mind the old adage that you should be careful how you treat people on the way up the ladder lest you run into them again when you're coming down.

 

 

 

*Steroids can also aid recovery but as Lance found to his cost when he was popped for using cortisone, they're also easily detectable. Other than that you have stimulants which were old hat by the 1960s and the usual selection of asthma treatments and other off-the-shelf stuff that aren't really going to make the difference in a 1500-2000 mile bike race.

 

 

According to the ever reliable @theraceradio the rest of Lance's sponsors are ditching him too, so far confirmed exits from Nike, RadioShack, Giro (helmets) Anhauser Busch and Trek. Only Oakley left to pull the plug.

 

 

 

Speaking of RadioShack, is there a bigger farce than Brunyeel walking the plank and being replaced by Kim fucking Andersen? Truly hilarious stuff. Also I didn't know Trek had ditched him, I bet LeMond allowed himself a quiet chuckle when he heard.

[TheHowieLama]

 

But even assuming that you're right about the level playing field (which you're not), there's more to the Armstrong scandal than cheating or cheating successfully. (He certainly wasn't the only cheat or only successful cheat, even if he was the most successful cheat.) The story is really about the culture of intimidation (of other cyclists, their family members, and sceptical journalists) and the culture of silence (of the relevant authorities).

 

Armstrong bullied pretty much everyone who challenged him, and could do so as a massively wealthy British superstar, and charity-hero. He also paid off the relevant authorities, and could do so for the same reasons. That's the fucking scandal. The sport of cycling was rotten. And Armstrong was a major cause of that (though certainly not the sole cause).

 

Replace Armstrong with Ferguson each time here - sound familiar?

[lifetime fan]

Lance Armstrong: Governing body UCI set to announce drugs verdict

 

 

Cycling's governing body will reveal their response to the United States Anti-Doping Agency's (Usada) report into Lance Armstrong on Monday.

 

The International Cycling Union (UCI) could back Usada in stripping the Texan of his seven Tour de France titles.

 

However, it could also take the matter to the Court of Arbitration for Sport.

 

"I've been better, but I've also been worse," said Armstrong in a speech on Friday to mark the 15th anniversary of his cancer charity, Livestrong.

 

"It's been a difficult couple of weeks, for me, for my family, for my friends, for this foundation."

 

Armstrong, 41, received a life ban from Usada for what the organisation called "the most sophisticated, professionalised and successful doping programme that sport has ever seen".

 

The American, who overcame cancer to return to professional cycling, won the Tour de France in seven successive years from 1999 to 2005.

 

He has always denied doping but chose not to fight the charges filed against him.

 

Usada released a 1,000-page report earlier this month which included sworn testimony from 26 people, including 15 riders with knowledge of the US Postal Service Team and the doping activities of its members.

 

Usada praised the "courage" shown by the riders in coming forward and breaking the sport's "code of silence".

 

Armstrong, who retired in 2005 but returned in 2009 before retiring for good two years later, has not commented on the details of Usada's report. His lawyer Tim Herman, however, has described it as a "one-sided hatchet job".

 

Tour de France director Christian Prudhomme said there should be "no winner" of the Tour for each of the seven years where Armstrong won if the decision to strip him of his victories is upheld.

 

Last week, Armstrong lost three of his main sponsors with sportswear giant Nike, cycle maker Trek and Budweiser brewer Anheuser-Busch all cutting ties with him.

 

Armstrong has also stepped down as chairman of his cancer charity Livestrong.

[Josef Svejk]

Shamed Lance Armstrong stripped of seven Tour de France titles and 'deserves to be forgotten' say ICU - Others - More Sports - The Independent

 

The International Cycling Union have today announced their decision to strip Lance Armstrong of his seven Tour de France titles.

 

The announcement follows a report by the United States Anti-Doping Agency which revealed evidence that the American cyclist had doped throughout his unparralled career.

 

Speaking at today's press conference UCI president Pat McQuaid said: "UCI will not appeal to the Court of Arbitration and recognise the sanctions USADA has imposed [on Armstrong]. UCI will back the life ban and strip him of his seven Tour de France titles."

 

The USADA stripped Armstrong of the Tour titles he won between 1999 and 2005 and banned him for life after the cyclist announced in August he would no longer fight the charges being brought against him, claiming their investigation was a "witch hunt". Those sanctions needed to be rubber stamped by the ICU, which they now have been.

 

The USADA's report was released earlier this month, and was incredibly damning of Armstrong, claiming he was at the centre of "the most sophisticated, professionalised and successful doping program that sport has ever seen.”

 

The 1,000 page report on the activities of Armstrong's US Postal Service team included testimony from 11 of Armstrong's former team-mates and the evidence was "conclusive and undeniable proof" of "one of the most sordid chapters in sports history"

 

Support for Armstrong dwindled in light of the report, including sponsors Nike, who throughout the allegations which have dogged his career have defended the American. Nike said the move was made in the face of “seemingly insurmountable evidence”. Trek and Anheuser-Busch have also ended their association with the cyclist.

 

Despite calls to do so, Armstrong has refused to admit his role in the scandal, and is yet to address the USADA report head on. He made his first public appearance on Friday since the report was released as part of his charity Livestrong's 15th anniversary celebrations, telling a 1,700-strong gathering: "I am truly humbled by your support.

 

"It's been an interesting couple of weeks. It's been a difficult couple of weeks for me and my family, my friends and this foundation.

 

"I say, 'I've been better, but I've also been worse'."

 

The revelations have been dreadful for cycling, harming the reputation of the sport perhaps beyond repair. Already Dutch bank Rabobank have withdrawn as a team sponsor after a 17 year association.

 

Team Sky principal Dave Brailsford has looked to cut a line between the past and the present and future. The team that propelled Bradley Wiggins to the Tour de France title during the summer has been a staunch opposer of doping, yet due to their success, has come in for scrutiny in light of the Armstrong case.

 

"We set this team up as clean and our job is to make them go faster," he has said. "But some of the tentacles of the past are impacting. So when people see the huge advances we are making, because of what happened in the past it is understandable that people are sceptical. What we want to work towards is a future where there is no doubt, so that when someone moves performance forward nobody questions it."

[lifetime fan]

UCI still going after Kimmage.

[lifetime fan]

UCI showing themselves to be the hypocritical twats they are.

[Champ]

UCI showing themselves to be the hypocritical twats they are.

What is it about governing bodies? No need to answer that

[lifetime fan]

You can watch the presser here.

 

BBC Sport - Sportsday - breaking sports news

[lifetime fan]

Pat McQuaid saying the UCI would still take donations from riders towards anti doping.

[lifetime fan]

He's now trying to justify accepting the donation from Armstrong despite knowing of his suspicious EPO test.

[Josef Svejk]

UCI plan: sweep Armstrong under the carpet; everything's grand...

[lifetime fan]

BBC sports editor David Bond: "UCI has changed story again on the infamous $100k Armstrong donation. Now says the money wasn't paid until 2007. Previous accounts said 05."

[lifetime fan]

BBC sports editor David Bond: "Unbelievable that teams and top riders would still be able to give donations for the fight against doping. Has UCI learned nothing."

[Josef Svejk]

"Is that bullshit I smell?"

 

[Champ]

What is it about governing bodies? No need to answer that

Surprise surprise. Pat McQuaid, 'I have no intention of resigning'

[L19red]

Armstrong deserves to be forgotten in Cycling. Thats got to sting.

 

Stand by for the law suits

[lifetime fan]

Now I could be wrong. But I get the impression McQuaid doesn't like Paul Kimmage and 'his journalist friends'.