Really Bemused by this story....

Keith1 · Aug 29, 2012

Any of our American friends have a take on it?......

<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:WordDocument> <w:View>Normal</w:View> <w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom> <w:TrackMoves/> <w:TrackFormatting/> <w

unctuationKerning/> <w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/> <w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid> <w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent> <w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText> <w

oNotPromoteQF/> <w:LidThemeOther>EN-GB</w:LidThemeOther> <w:LidThemeAsian>X-NONE</w:LidThemeAsian> <w:LidThemeComplexScript>X-NONE</w:LidThemeComplexScript> <w:Compatibility> <w:BreakWrappedTables/> <w:SnapToGridInCell/> <w:WrapTextWithPunct/> <w:UseAsianBreakRules/> <w

ontGrowAutofit/> <w:SplitPgBreakAndParaMark/> <w

ontVertAlignCellWithSp/> <w

ontBreakConstrainedForcedTables/> <w

ontVertAlignInTxbx/> <w:Word11KerningPairs/> <w:CachedColBalance/> </w:Compatibility> <w:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel> <m:mathPr> <m:mathFont m:val="Cambria Math"/> <m:brkBin m:val="before"/> <m:brkBinSub m:val="--"/> <m:smallFrac m:val="off"/> <m:dispDef/> <m:lMargin m:val="0"/> <m:rMargin m:val="0"/> <m:defJc m:val="centerGroup"/> <m:wrapIndent m:val="1440"/> <m:intLim m:val="subSup"/> <m:naryLim m:val="undOvr"/> </m:mathPr></w:WordDocument> </xml><![endif]--> Lance Armstong's Statement of August 23, 2012

AUSTIN, Texas - August 23rd, 2012 - There comes a point in every man's life when he has to say, "Enough is enough." For me, that time is now. I have been dealing with claims that I cheated and had an unfair advantage in winning my seven Tours since 1999. Over the past three years, I have been subjected to a two-year federal criminal investigation followed by Travis Tygart's unconstitutional witch hunt. The toll this has taken on my family, and my work for our foundation and on me leads me to where I am today – finished with this nonsense.
I had hoped that a federal court would stop USADA’s charade. Although the court was sympathetic to my concerns and recognized the many improprieties and deficiencies in USADA’s motives, its conduct, and its process, the court ultimately decided that it could not intervene.
If I thought for one moment that by participating in USADA’s process, I could confront these allegations in a fair setting and – once and for all – put these charges to rest, I would jump at the chance. But I refuse to participate in a process that is so one-sided and unfair. Regardless of what Travis Tygart says, there is zero physical evidence to support his outlandish and heinous claims. The only physical evidence here is the hundreds of controls I have passed with flying colors. I made myself available around the clock and around the world. In-competition. Out of competition. Blood. Urine. Whatever they asked for I provided. What is the point of all this testing if, in the end, USADA will not stand by it?
From the beginning, however, this investigation has not been about learning the truth or cleaning up cycling, but about punishing me at all costs. I am a retired cyclist, yet USADA has lodged charges over 17 years old despite its own 8-year limitation. As respected organizations such as UCI and USA Cycling have made clear, USADA lacks jurisdiction even to bring these charges. The international bodies governing cycling have ordered USADA to stop, have given notice that no one should participate in USADA’s improper proceedings, and have made it clear the pronouncements by USADA that it has banned people for life or stripped them of their accomplishments are made without authority. And as many others, including USADA’s own arbitrators, have found, there is nothing even remotely fair about its process. USADA has broken the law, turned its back on its own rules, and stiff-armed those who have tried to persuade USADA to honor its obligations. At every turn, USADA has played the role of a bully, threatening everyone in its way and challenging the good faith of anyone who questions its motives or its methods, all at U.S. taxpayers’ expense. For the last two months, USADA has endlessly repeated the mantra that there should be a single set of rules, applicable to all, but they have arrogantly refused to practice what they preach. On top of all that, USADA has allegedly made deals with other riders that circumvent their own rules as long as they said I cheated. Many of those riders continue to race today.
The bottom line is I played by the rules that were put in place by the UCI, WADA and USADA when I raced. The idea that athletes can be convicted today without positive A and B samples, under the same rules and procedures that apply to athletes with positive tests, perverts the system and creates a process where any begrudged ex-teammate can open a USADA case out of spite or for personal gain or a cheating cyclist can cut a sweetheart deal for themselves. It’s an unfair approach, applied selectively, in opposition to all the rules. It’s just not right.
USADA cannot assert control of a professional international sport and attempt to strip my seven Tour de France titles. I know who won those seven Tours, my teammates know who won those seven Tours, and everyone I competed against knows who won those seven Tours. We all raced together. For three weeks over the same roads, the same mountains, and against all the weather and elements that we had to confront. There were no shortcuts, there was no special treatment. The same courses, the same rules. The toughest event in the world where the strongest man wins. Nobody can ever change that. Especially not Travis Tygart.
Today I turn the page. I will no longer address this issue, regardless of the circumstances. I will commit myself to the work I began before ever winning a single Tour de France title: serving people and families affected by cancer, especially those in underserved communities. This October, my Foundation will celebrate 15 years of service to cancer survivors and the milestone of raising nearly $500 million. We have a lot of work to do and I'm looking forward to an end to this pointless distraction. I have a responsibility to all those who have stepped forward to devote their time and energy to the cancer cause. I will not stop fighting for that mission. Going forward, I am going to devote myself to raising my five beautiful (and energetic) kids, fighting cancer, and attempting to be the fittest 40-year old on the planet.

JeffYoung · Aug 29, 2012

He cheated (along with everyone else t the time), hid it better than others, finally got caught and so he throws in the towel.

blueovalz · Aug 29, 2012

It was an interesting turn for this cyclist, but who knows what the true story is. If in his mind he won fair and square, and he doesn't need the recognition for that, then he's at peace. If the situation is as he claims, a witch-hunt, then I feel for him. The spokesman for the USADA was very polished and professional in his interview regarding their investigation and pursuit of this result (which bodes well for them), but anybody these days can be honed to deliver a flawless interview. If this process has any resemblance to our current day prosecutorial process in this country, then justice was probably overridden by the desire to "win" regardless of the facts or the process.

jcdean · Aug 29, 2012

The USADA have been over achievers for quite some time.

Still a fan of Lance here.

Neal · Aug 29, 2012

F the USADA. Impetulant use of our tax dollars. Show me the proof. No one has ever won the TDF seven times and no one will likely do this again. Being a competative amature cyclist I can tell you doping ain't the key to winning. Respect for the discipline and team work necessary to accomplish this. Respect for the charity work he does. The record books have been closed and you can't erase history...

lonesomebob · Aug 29, 2012

Thinking back on my love for playing sports on the street with my friends, all day every day possible during summer vacation, reminds me of how great sports are until the "adults" take over.

Al Wohlstrom · Aug 29, 2012

At this point they don't have conclusive proof that Armstrong use doping or steroids. He passed all of his tests over the years. They do have jealous asses like Greg Lammond and other "friends" saying he did. He beat testicular cancer and is probably one of the hardest working athletes ever. His life and career are being torn down by hearsay and those that have some kind of perverse sexual satisfaction watching the best of the best fall. All the millions of tax payer dollars spent really worked out with Roger Clements. Another case of big government forgetting what their actual job is.

Olivier · Aug 29, 2012

"Played by the rules"

Disclaimer: I don't care about LA, nor cyclism nor any other sports. I'm not the kind of guy watching sports on TV. And I can't understand why people are doing so, so much, but everybody is free to be a soccer fan, cyclism fan or curling fan or whatever you want fan.
Not that I have a problem with that but hust to enlight that I am probably more objective than "fans".

Living in France, and (believe me!) against my willing, I hear every year news about the "tour de france". To make a long story short, each year, there are more or less dopping suspicions about one or another. And each year, you have the same (not same peoples) interviews from the laboratory responsibles of the blood and urine analysis. And each year brings the same story. "yes we made a lot of testings, bla bla bla, and you know, we are not equiped to detect the last drugs which, until they are not officially banned from sports, we can't test them and so can't blame anybody for using them".

Last week, when the new that LA was giving up, there was a guy from one of thos official laboratory speaking and he told that they had made some analysis on old samples from LA and discovered products that weren't officially know by the time they were taken.

One more time, I don't care about LA. heard he does a great job with his foundation, and good on him.

But, who can really believe, that the guys (not only him OK?) that are runiing longer and way faster than all the others (the ones you never hear about and represents the majority) during French summer (believe me or not it can be f*kin hard!), for 2 or 3 weeks, on montains roads and so on... are 100% biologically as you and me?
I strongly believe that they are great athletes, but I also strongly believe that there is no logical explanation about how they go faster each year... New tyres? New gearings with much less friction? Lighter bikes? Hummm....

Loads of money involved behind all those "sports"... That's the point, for me at least.

Olivier.

Al Wohlstrom · Aug 29, 2012

JeffYoung said:
He cheated (along with everyone else t the time), hid it better than others, finally got caught and so he throws in the towel.

Is this an opinion, or fact?

JeffYoung · Aug 29, 2012

The reasons Armstrong folded is the USADA has ten witnesses -- riders and coaches -- all willing to testify that they saw him dope, and that he had developed ways to hide it from the tests.

I don't hate LA (although everyone I know who has had contact with him thinks he is a jerk) and I think his achievements are amazing -- he won during a period when everyone was doping, although he was doping as well. He just did it better than everyone else.

But the bottom line is he is a cheater, and he folded his tent when he realized the USADA was going to put on a procession of witnesses who would prove he was doping.

Al Wohlstrom · Aug 29, 2012

JeffYoung said:
The reasons Armstrong folded is the USADA has ten witnesses -- riders and coaches -- all willing to testify that they saw him dope, and that he had developed ways to hide it from the tests.

I don't hate LA (although everyone I know who has had contact with him thinks he is a jerk) and I think his achievements are amazing -- he won during a period when everyone was doping, although he was doping as well. He just did it better than everyone else.

But the bottom line is he is a cheater, and he folded his tent when he realized the USADA was going to put on a procession of witnesses who would prove he was doping.

I think spending hundreds of thousands on lawyers to fight this helped in his decision.The bottom line is that you "think" he is a cheater and you are convicting him on hearsay although he passed tests that nobody else does while doping due to some magic formula that he has and no one else does. They had witnesses against Clements, that worked well.

JeffYoung · Aug 29, 2012

Ten critical witnesses, incuding George Hincappie:

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/18/s...tant-but-reliable-witness.html?pagewanted=all

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/25/s...ut-armstrongs-titles.html?_r=1&pagewanted=all

Al Wohlstrom · Aug 29, 2012

JeffYoung said:
Ten critical witnesses, incuding George Hincappie:

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/18/s...tant-but-reliable-witness.html?pagewanted=all

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/25/s...ut-armstrongs-titles.html?_r=1&pagewanted=all

Jeff, you are an officer of the court, I would think that you of all people would have reservations about hearsay testimony. Armstrong set tons of records, lots of jealous people (lamond) out there. I will wait for the outcome. Either way, it's a witchhunt.
"The details of what Hincapie, 39, told antidoping authorities remains a mystery"

Pete · Aug 29, 2012

There is no proof, L A is probably one of the most drug tested athletes in the history of the sport and has passed every test. He is guilty by public opinion and hearsay. What a shame.

brianstewart · Aug 29, 2012

This makes interesting reading. As an ex-cycle racer I strongly suspect anyone who was/is winning against known drug users is also using.

Balls, Wheels, Doping. • It's not about the bike

Cliffbeer2 · Aug 29, 2012

As a fairly accomplished amateur athlete in my youth, and an experienced cyclist, it's my believe that the use of certain performance enhancing drugs can make a significant difference in winning/losing. When everyone trains really hard, and the teamwork is solid across most teams, such as is the case with the vast majority of teams and cyclists in the TDF, the delta between winning and being mediocre is very, very small. Use of a performance drug can very easily provide that difference.

Thing is, it's my impression that MANY of the cyclists are using these drugs...in smaller doses or disguised in various ways. So, when one uses, they don't really feel like they're cheating that much....because everyone else is doing it! But the bottom line is that to win you can't be doped up. If the only way you can win is by doping, you don't deserve the title no matter how prevalent it is among the other competitors. One thing has no relation to the other. You're either a man or a mouse....in professional sport, as in life....and if you're doping then you're a mouse no matter what else anybody else is doing. You competitors bad behavior doesn't excuse your own.

Now, whether LA was doping or not is a matter of evidence and proof.....proof that hasn't been fully established. However, what does seem clear to me is that LA couldn't be proven to be in the wrong (either doping, or perjuring himself about it) at the threshold of a criminal level ("beyond a reasonable doubt....") whereas at a civil level ("more likely than not...") it may have appeared to him that he was going to lose conclusively with no opportunity to credibly deny it further. So instead of risking losing in a final civil conclusion on appeal - which would have totally destroyed his record and credibility - he chose to just withdraw while at the same time denying all allegations in the hopes of trying to preserve some remaining credibility. Having been around some people who have had some incredible success and fame, it seems to me that many become highly addicted to that recognition and will do absolutely anything they can to retain it as much as possible, even when that means just managing to cut short the losses.

His charitable work is super admirable and stands on its own. It's probable that his charity wouldn't have been nearly as successful without his record of achievement, but regardless, he's worked hard and done great charitable things with his resources and energy.

I can't help but feel some compassion for competitors of his along the way who chose to take the high road and not dope...and perhaps had little or no success because of that choice and subsequently disappeared into obscurity. There's considerable evidence against LA that he did, in fact, dope consistently across the years. This is mostly based upon testimony of other people rather than failed drug tests because, frankly, he generally passed any and all drug tests he submitted to. Whether that means he didn't dope, or that he was just really good at disguising it is really the heart of the matter. Personally, I tend to think it's the latter, but that's just me.

No doubt he's a spectacular athlete and deserves a lot of recognition regardless.

JeffYoung · Aug 29, 2012

Al Wohlstrom said:
Jeff, you are an officer of the court, I would think that you of all people would have reservations about hearsay testimony. Armstrong set tons of records, lots of jealous people (lamond) out there. I will wait for the outcome. Either way, it's a witchhunt.
"The details of what Hincapie, 39, told antidoping authorities remains a mystery"

I think you don't understand what hearsay is.

Hincapie and nine others were set to testify that the either saw Armstrong dope, or had first hand knowledge of the team's cover up.

That's not hearsay.

I think we all know enough about Armstrong to know he would not quit if he thought he could win. When the USADA got folks within the team to finally start talking, that was the end.

It appears you won't be convinced until Armstrong himself admits he doped, and that won't happen.

But as others here have pointed out, it was impossible to win in that era without doping.

iank2112 · Aug 29, 2012

JeffYoung said:
I think you don't understand what hearsay is.

Hincapie and nine others were set to testify that the either saw Armstrong dope, or had first hand knowledge of the team's cover up.

That's not hearsay.

I think we all know enough about Armstrong to know he would not quit if he thought he could win. When the USADA got folks within the team to finally start talking, that was the end.

It appears you won't be convinced until Armstrong himself admits he doped, and that won't happen.

But as others here have pointed out, it was impossible to win in that era without doping.

Except that it is probably the same witnesses the Feds questioned during secret grand jury meetings a few years ago which eventually led to the Feds dropping the case against him ...

read the following and see what LA was up against:

The Kafkaesque Trial Of Lance Armstrong: A Former Federal Prosecutor On The US Anti Doping Agency's Disregard For Due Process - Forbes

kaspa · Aug 29, 2012

If this isnt a witch hunt against Lance i dont no what is, hell you could easily get a half dozen of my fellow competitors with the right persuation to say i was putting Nitro in my fuel , hence thats why i was winning all the time, even though my fuel was tested the same as every one elses and was clean. its all hear say fueled by jelousy, the tests he had and passed where the same as every one else had to pass, so he's clean end of story. he's done it and no one can take that away, regardless of what the try to say or do.
John
an old cyclist whos schoolboy dream was the tour, but wasnt quite good enough.

Veek · Aug 29, 2012

It would be interesting to know how many of Mr. Armstrong's accusers were offered some sort of waiver from prosecution or other inducement for their testimony.
Its sort of like getting a drunk driving conviction after passing the breathalizer but based on the statements of those that were drinking with you that you were drunk.

Really Bemused by this story....

Keith

Jeff Young

Terry Oxandale

Skinny Man

Joey Dean

Neal

Bob Fechter

Al Wohlstrom

Olivier S

Al Wohlstrom

Jeff Young

Al Wohlstrom

Jeff Young

Al Wohlstrom

Pete McCluskey.

Brian Stewart

Cliff Beer

Jeff Young

Ian K

John

Pat

Similar threads