Lance Armstrong

LOL! Just saw on the news he's 'fed up trying to clear his name' and is now relinquishing his TDF titles. Of course it's all just because he can't deal with the pressure of the investigation, right? I mean, he wasn't actually doping, was he? *snigger*

Who they going to give his medals to now then? There aren't many of them left that haven't admitted doping!

It's certainly interesting that his comments on the matter are usually in the line of  'I have never tested positive/failed a test' as opposed to 'I would never consider doping, because it is wrong'.

Makes a change for another sport to be highlighted for it's problems rather than football for a change.

I'm curious to know how the American anti-doping body can strip him of his Tour de France medals. Is that in their jurisdiction?

Muttley, they're Americans, it's likely that they don't realise that France is "abroad".

Doesn't America rule the world?

It's in their jurisdiction to the extent I think the UCI have signed the WADA code which means that they should respect the decision of national anti doping agencies - I think.   That said I'm pretty sure the UCI have been at odds with USADA over who should pursue this case and they wont want to strip him of 7 titles - not least because it opens up a can of worms as to who they are awarded to - though there is also speculation in some circles that the UCI actually went along with Armstrong doping because of the profile he brought to the sport - and possibly the money he gave to the UCI/people within the UCI !

All a bit of an embarassing farce isn't it?

I don't believe he ever went to the moon.

Runs with Dogs, you sound quite pleased with the whole thing?

If it comes out even he's guilty, and all those amazing stories of having Cancer and coming back to the top against the odds are all fake, then it's quite a depressing day all round.

Nothing to smile about at all, and cycling just becomes a complete waste of time.

Colin lol Brilliant.

I think a majority of people want LA to be a superman after all that happened and not because of taking any drugs. I literally just finished his book over the weekend and he seems pretty dead against doping of any kind. I know saying it doesn't mean he didn't. But he does come across as and honest chap. During his treatment he was taking EPO to help fight the cancer? How long does that stay in your system? Or did he carry on taking it to help afterwards, dunno?

But to be fair I think he just wants to get on with life as he really does know life is too short and perhaps he just wants to enjoy being a dad and not worrying about the past like he makes clear in his book.

I find it surprising that so so many people are still clinging to this idea that he was clean.

At least 10 former teammates have stated that he was doping along with various other people involved around his US Postal team.

Lance Armstrong is an incredibly litigious individual and has sued people at every accusation, wriggling out on technicalities. And despite knowing how litigious he is the authorities feel perfectly able to strip him of all his titles since 1999.

He may be innocent until proven guilty but his stance over time has changed from 'I have never doped' to 'I have never tested positive' to 'I refuse to mount a defence'.

And for a man who apparently controlled every aspect of his team it is amazing how many of his teammates were proven dopers, apparently while he was totally unaware.

Stevie G, I suppose I AM rather pleased. I detest cheats, and I detest even more cheats who don't 'fess up when they're caught. And for all the reasons parkrunfan has given above, and many more, I am utterly convinced he was a cheat. And at times also a rather unpleasant person.

It's depressing, yes, but not as depressing as letting him retain his titles and everything else that goes with them rather than spoil his 'cycling legend, charity fundraising hero and all round good guy' public persona.

I just hope to fuck Wiggins really is clean...

Detesting cheats is fair enough, but, at the moment, Armstrong isn't a cheat.  Over 500 tests and none of them have shown that he's been doping.  On the other side, teammates who've been caught are grassing on him.  Go figure.  Prisoner's dilemma.

As PRF says there is no argument here - he doped.

Does that make cycling a complete waste of time - no more so than athletics and most other sports that rely primarily on power or endurance.   Do people really think it's possible to run 9.6 or 9.7 for 100 metres clean ?

I'm torn. He's a horrible bloke, but with a great story. He really has never failed a test, but lots of people are apparently prepared to testify against him - I suppose one has to wonder about their motivations for doing so, because it's possible that they have hidden agendas themselves. And saying you're not fighting something is simply circumstancial evidence, not absolute proof of guilt. It seems to me he 'probably' doped, but we're unlikely to know the truth beyond all question. As others have already said, that period is a farce anyway - all sorts of people who denied for years and years and years and years that they didn't dope suddenly admitting it. One can only hope it's clean now, but they tend to keep ahead of the testers.

Lots of athletes have passed tests and ended up with doping suspensions because they've been caught in other ways - in cycling Millar, Ulrich, Basso, Virenque for four - in athletics what about the whole Balco scandal.    In football it's known that Zidane visited a clinic where blood doping took place.   I think it's likely that we get to know a tiny fraction of what really goes on.   

Going back to the 100 metres - we know that event was dirty as anything - yet we are supposed to believe it has cleaned itself up whilst still knocking a few tenths of a second off the world record  and several athletes destroying the times the cheats of 10-15 years ago were running - pull the other one - at least in cycling we've seen races get measurably slower in recent years.  

runs-with-dogs wrote (see)

It's depressing, yes, but not as depressing as letting him retain his titles and everything else that goes with them rather than spoil his 'cycling legend, charity fundraising hero and all round good guy' public persona.

Problem is, this whole 'stripping of titles' thing is just nonsense.  Once you start doing that the whole event becomes nul & void, because you can't find anyone incontrovertibly clean to award it to.  And then do we go on and strip Pantani, Ulrich, Riis of their TdF wins too?  How about Indurain, 5 wins in a row before EPO was detectable?  Eddy Merckx failed a test once, how about we strip him of his too? 

Depressing though it is, cycling in those days was pretty much a level playing field, they were all at it.  It's impossible to sort it out, so the best option IMO is to draw a line under the whole lot and put all the effort into keeping today's racing clean.