Skip to comments.Armstrong Aide Talks of Doping and Price Paid
Posted on 10/13/2012 4:43:34 PM PDT by Vision
Ms. OReilly said Mr. Armstrong demonized her as a prostitute with a drinking problem, and had her hauled into court in England. Ultimately, a legal settlement was reached, and Ms. OReilly tried to pick up her life, sometimes talking about Mr. Armstrong and drugs, but to little notice.
Ms. OReilly said she was once in a room giving Mr. Armstrong a massage when he and officials on the team fabricated a story to conceal a positive drug test result. Ms. OReilly said Mr. Armstrong told her, You know enough to bring me down.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
The NYT is guilty of doping the news they publish.
Yes, but not here.
I read somewhere that he’d passed every official test, for many years. Now, I’ve recently read that the USADA has all kinds of negative drug test results, witness testimony etc, for evidence. I honestly don’t know what to believe, but I’m getting very skeptical of LA altogether.
One of Armstong’s tactics is to be outrageous with lies. And that he never failed one is his biggest lie.
Wire at Hotel ....
Yes, I’d be interested in reading it. I need to get a factual grip on this whole thing.
I was a strong Lance supporter for as long as I could find something to hold on to and a reason to believe him. The evidence to the contrary has moved me.
According to the Democrats Romney is a Liar, thief, and Murderer! Do I believe that? No!!! Lance Armstrong had to take a blood test before each Race and after. If he had been doping they would have caught him and Kicked him from the tours. This BS came out after that other American got caught doping then he said after he was caught Lance did it too.
Thus the investigation! Now they catch him 5 years after the fact this is really fishy!!!
If that's it, any evidence it actually works?
Is that what LA is accused of?
Or is it more?
You mean the guy who was a bike tech for Armstrong's team for a little under two years who got pissed off at Armstrong because he didn't buy a bike shop for him?
At least get your story straight......
Wouldn't that have been documented by the UIC and resulted in at least a suspension? Please, show us proof......and not the crap from the witch hunters.
This will give you that, and more.
I'm chomping at the bit to talk to someone about it. You were thinking about it right?
After reading the chilling and damming reviews, I’m going to order that book; thanks.
The first time was in the 1969 Giro d'Italia where he tested positive for the stimulant Reactivan at Savona, after leading the race through 16 stages. He was expelled from the Giro. The controversy began to swirl when his test results were not handled in the correct manner; they were released to the press before all parties involved (Merckx and team officials) were notified.
Merckx was very upset, and to this day, protests his innocence. He argued there were no counter-experts nor counter-analysis. He said the stage during which he was allegedly using drugs was easy so there was no need. "
" "If you ain't cheatin', you ain't tryin'" is an old NASCAR expression. Junior Johnson had this to say about his creativity when it came to building cars:
"I loved the game. Maybe I'd have four of five new things on a car that might raise a question. But I'd always leave something that was outside of the regulations in a place where the inspectors could easily find it.
"They'd tell me it was illegal, I'd plead guilty, and they'd carry it away thinking they caught me. But they didn't check some other things that I thought were even more special." "
No news here.
Reallly... it's time to move-on.
Post back after you’ve read it. It’ll be hard to put down.
I’ll bet that this story gets more coverage than the Libya attack and cover up.
I don’t give a rats arse about some dumb jock cheating while he road his bicycle for a living.
It is hard to know what to believe.Some people pile on.
If you read Hamilton’s book you’ll know exactly what to believe.
I’ve always felt like Armstrong’s biggest “crime” was the fact that he is arrogant and not really likeable.
Had he been fuzzy, humble and warm everybody on the planet may not want to pile on.
Did he dope? I don’t know. But it sounds like everybody in the pro biking community did/does. Sounds to me like Landis had a Conseco moment and decided to take everybody down with him.
He still does some excellent work in the fight against cancer, imho. And overcame some pretty amazing odds to be able to even ride a bike.
Weasel Armstrong is one of the greatest frauds in the history of sports. Pure slimebag.
You’re not familiar with the culture of cycling in the last 30 years.
Oh they don’t check you?
Sure, they check for doping. The problem is that it is just too easy to cheat the tests.
Doping in various ways has been part of the cycling world really since the very beginning of competitive cycling. It was mainly amphetamines prior to the development of steroids and prior to blood doping.
Erythropoietin(EPO) was the drug that demolished the notion that someone could race clean and still be competitive. For a long time there was no test for EPO, so the people in charge tried to limit its use by not allowing a hematocrit of more than 50. When an actual test for EPO became available, the doping doctors and cyclists found that they could beat the test by microdosing EPO( by injecting small amounts under the skin.) They could calibrate how much EPO they could take and how long it would take to clear from their system. They also found that they could use EPO to mask blood doping. Blood doping(removing blood from a cyclist and transfusing it back in at a later date) results in an abnomally high proportion of mature red blood cells. EPO stimulates production of new, thus young, red blood cells which helps hide the blood doping. I think it was Andy Hampsten who said that before EPO a racer could be clean and still compete because the other drugs had enough negatives that someone who wasn’t using wasn’t at too huge of a disadvantage.
As far as beating the tests, It’s mainly about making sure the drugs have cleared a cyclist’s system enough by the time a test is likely to occur, injecting saline to dilute the concentration of drugs in the system(or to decrease the hematocrit to an acceptable number), and watching out for testers and avoiding them when necessary. George Hincapie(Armstrong teammate) has ridden in more Tours de France than anyone in the history of the race and never tested positive for drugs. He has admitted using them. It was standard practice for cycling teams during Armstrong’s era(and unfortunately probably still is). Tyler Hamilton(also an Armstrong teammate) is another cyclist who passed many, many tests while being a habitual doper. He was only caught because apparently someone mixed up his blood doping bag with someone else’s, and a test showed he had someone else’s blood in his system.
Cyclists joke that a doping test is really an I.Q. test. That’s how easy it is to beat the tests.
Very true. So much is hidden, that it all needs to come out and be sifted-through for facts, and the truth will finally come out.
and still nothing from Lance Armstrong.
It looks like the ghosts of Armstrong’s past bullying may be coming back to haunt him:
London (CNN) — London’s Sunday Times is considering suing Lance Armstrong over a libel case he brought against the newspaper over doping allegations which resulted in a costly payout.
But ... but ... never mind.
I would like to see the UCI then do an investigation on the entire sport, including Bernard Hinault, Miguel Indurain, Alberto Contador, Carlos Sastre, and Oscar Pereiro, on all the involvement in drugs in cycling.
Bump. I am quite depressed about this whole thing. I always wondered why my old hero LeMond just wouldn’t leave it alone. Does that mean - could it mean - that LeMond was not a doper?
I guess I am disappointed the most by the lack of personal support support from Lance's mates and friends. Where are the glowing testimonials of what a great guy he is and how he always played it straight and encouraged others to do so? I used to ride with a guy who was a stud in every discipline but was such a jerk that no one sided with him in any disagreement. Of course, that means nothing in the scope of things here.
This doping thing has always been a double edged sword. If they let it go it could lead to horrible outcomes, but if they try to restrict it where do they draw the line. IS Red Bull and Goo still ok?
It would be interesting to see UCI declare a one time amnesty and ask everyone to honestly answer if they have ever used or witnessed use just to see how widespread the problem is and if the screening agents are just as widespread as the PEDs.
I have a little trouble believing a team that was cheating by doping would discuss their cheating in front of other people who weren’t part of it. It would take a lot of smarts, and an understanding of secrecy, to pull off a multi-year team-wide doping program, and that is the opposite of what is described by this woman.
And while I have no idea if Armstrong is guilty of anything or not, I firmly believe that you could get dozens of people to lie about something. That’s pretty much the standard practice of the elected democrats these days, even the “good ones”.
So I don’t find 20 “personal testimonies” much more compelling than 1. Firm evidence. The biggest problem the pro-doping-believer crowd has to overcome is the ability of an entire team to apparently thwart the active doping regime, WHILE almost every other team kept having their stars nailed.
I believe in American exceptionalism, but i don’t believe that Team Postal Service would have been uniquely qualified to beat the drug tests. And if it was this easy to do, no way Landis would have been caught.
It does seem odd that this agency claims to have positive drug tests, and yet in all the years everybody has been gunning for Armstrong, nobody could seal the deal.
Also, it is still disturbing that most of the people who are against Armstrong seem to have a personal hatred for him, which could cloud their judgment.
Oddly, if it wasn’t for the strong anti-doping programs, it would be asier to believe Armstrong was doping.
But there’s a book. Sometimes I wonder if someone here gets royalties for that book. :-)
Doping is one of those strange rules, where apparently following the rules isn’t so cut and dried. In most sports, everybody knows you are going for any advantage you can. So part of the game is to push the limits of the rules.
Like in football, people are holding all the time, the key is whether the refs decide to call it. WIth tennis it was the rackets, people pushing the limits of what a “racket” really was. Golf has all the wierd golf clubs, and the different golf balls.
I loved the move “The Flying Scotsman”, where the guy kept developing better bicycles, and the people who ran the “sport”, who didn’t like him, kept changing the rules so he had to change his bike, eventually disqualifying him for some last-second rule.
So, “everybody” is against doping. But even casual sports people will take ibuprofen to cut down pain, will get cortisone injections, will do energy drinks and protein loading. People did hypobaric chambers, and did the thing where they simply stored off their own blood, and then got it re-transfused.
The sport had rules — we will test your blood, and if we find something, you will be punished. Imagine a baskteball game where, after the game, the referees sat down and watched the game in slo-mo, and retroactively applied penalties for every foul. It would be unworkable.
SO, if the doping test said you can’t have more than X amount of some drug, and you decided to use that drug but at less than X, and then later they decided to make it 1/2 X and re-tested your blood — were you cheating, or are they changing the rules? Suppose in NASCAR, they didn’t like who won, and after the race was over they decided to change some rule, and retested the car and disqualified the winner?
But now, some have decided that not only is getting caught later for something that met the “rules” at the time is a good thing, but that an athlete is evil and sick for even THINKING about trying to push the limits of the rules.
I’d understand if people were dissappointed in him, or were objectively in agreement that he deserved to be punished. But when I see people acting like they have cured the common cold, or repealed Obamacare, simply because they think Armstrong was caught breaking some rule, I wonder about their perspective on life.
I wonder if Great Britain’s laws actually allow people to sue over the outcome of a suit. If they win, can they be sued over THAT outcome? You could go on forever.
If so, apparently some of the riders were really stupid, because some really big names in the sport got caught and banned.
There were some football players that were a lot better at not getting called for penalties than others. It was part of the skill of the game.
If the stories were true, there's something to be admired about a guy who is able to push the limits and beat the system, over a period of a decade, while everybody is gunning for him.
If you read a book on this let me know.
The drug tests set the limit for how you can use drugs. The key is to use the drugs at lower levels than are prohibited by the tests, and at times not prohibited by the tests.
The tests define the limits of the rules, and beating the test is no different than the catcher who is able to convince the umpire that balls are actually strikes, or the wide receiver whose greatest skill is making the ref believe he was interfered with.
The advantage it might have had could go back to Armstrong's cancer therapy in 1996 which included EPO.
The pharmaceutical company providing it to him more than likely gave him inside information not available to others on its pharmacology. And from there he became skilled in its useage.
The company would have had a more than vested interest in his future success and given him what it could to aid in facilitating its useage and avoid its detection.
It would also have given him an excuse if he ever failed a drug test and an exemption for certain therapeutic useage.
Interestingly, most of those who are against Armstrong include the argument that NO cyclist wins without doping.
Which makes me wonder why they are so insistant that Armstrong be punished. If they are right, he was doing what everybody else did. Why they don’t think the entire records of all cyclists should be wiped out is the interesting question, and one that suggests they are more interested in seeing their hatred of Armstrong validated than actually bringing integrity to the sport.