Posted on 10/13/2012 4:13:16 AM PDT by GonzoII
The evidence presented in the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency's 202-page report on Lance Armstrong's alleged years of doping, scheming, pushing and evading is, according to its authors, "beyond strong." Even so, the case against Armstrong doesn't involve any definitive failed drug tests, a fact that the former seven-time Tour de France winner has long used to shield his claims to innocence.
So if Armstrong is the inveterate doper the USADA claims he is, how did he manage to avoid an unambiguous positive test during more than a decade of pro cycling?
Below is a rundown of the doping practices the USADA accuses Armstrong of using, and an explanation of how, in each case, he might have covered his tracks for so long. [How Did Armstrong Get Busted?]
Erythropoietin (EPO): A synthetic version of this naturally occurring hormone is used by cheating athletes to boost red blood cell counts, a change that temporarily supercharges endurance by increasing muscles' oxygen-carrying capacity. Before 2000, no test existed to distinguish the synthetic version of the hormone from its natural counterpart, so as long as athletes took doses that would keep their hematocrit (a measure of the volume percentage of blood made up of red blood cells) in a plausible range (below 50 percent), they could use this drug with impunity. And the report alleges that Armstrong's pre-2000 team did just that, fueling its 1999 Tour de France win....
(Excerpt) Read more at lifeslittlemysteries.com ...
Armstrong's critics have the perfect set-up...he can never “prove” his innocence and the critics can accuse endlessly.
I ask anyone to prove they did not take an injection years ago.
Having been in such a situation where to be accused is be considered guilty I can tell you it's maddening.
All those years and never a misstep.......how convenient for the accuser.
Ya know...I don't care what meds he was using...He wworked every day of his life at this, rode his butt off and won.
IMHO: They're all using something.
I wonder how much this investigation has cost, or perhaps wasted, is the better word. And who ends up paying for it.
"Plausable Range" meaning a level that an athlete could possibly have on their own without the need of a "boost"? A drug readily on the market and accessible to all cyclists?
Maybe that would explain how other riders were able to out distance Armstrong and win many of the TDF stages or at least keep up with him on the stages he did win - which in 2003 and 2005 was only one.
By gosh, that's it - they were ALL doped up!
Now that they've brought down Armstrong, I think it's time they go after Miguel Indurain......
In the years in question, that is absolutely true. Now there are probably some clean guys. The real mess comes in who will they give the 7 wins, another doper?
They have no actual proof but since everyone believes it it must be true. The only witnesses is his ex-wife and people who have a vendetta against him. Pretty weak case.
Pray for America
They are killing their own sport.
If Armstrong was smart enough to avoid getting caught, they all are and they are all dopers.
No one can be trusted and the sport and winning it is null and void.
This is the most stupid thing around , finding a man guilty because they think he was doping, but they cannot prove it.
Blood doping appears to be almost universal among professional cyclists. If one believes USADA. Based on sworn affidavits from cyclists, I could be a believer, but...
What do they propose as a solution? I haven’t seen anything other than a desire to go after US riders, which then leaves the US looking like a bad guy and in racing, at a distinct disadvantage to others.
If indeed they are “all doing it”, then it still comes down to who is the better rider and team tacticians as far as major wins are concerned. So, it appears to me that the rather benign efforts to marginally improve the bodies ability to recover from injury, and improve the oxygen holding capacity of the blood, are just factors of the competition. Not sure how this will all shake out, but it is beginning to look like the fed efforts to control Marijuana, leading to very high cost, and unintended consequences for absolutely no gain.
bikes are not equal, bats are not equal, balls are not equal, cars are not equal, athletes are not equal.
There's explicit mechanics and physics involved in sports....may the best mouse trap win.
And Mohammed Ali won because he could dance....really, really well. :-)
I’m still finding it hard to comprehend how a super doped up cyclist like Armstrong couldn’t have amassed a hundred mile lead over a 21 day, 2200 mile road course (2000,2005 TDF). And to only win one stage in each of those races is an embarrassment to the whole doping world......
Obsessions are like that. Someone selling a book can make an accusation, “How Did Lance Armstrong Avoid a Positive Doping Test?” in a headline and then offer their speculations as if it were “proof” of something.
No way he was using & passed 500+ tests.
Human nature sucks.
The 50 percent hematocrit criteria as indicating EPO use is not always reliable. One can have a >50% hematocrit due to living at altitude, or due to an asthmatic condition. An easy way to get a >50% value is to live an active lifestyle while living in a place like Leadville, CO (over 10,000 feet elevation).
USADA is partially funded by the ONDCP - Office of the National Drug Control Policy. So you're paying - the bill is due next April, on the 15th I think.
ALL of that was done for YEARS and not one positive or misstep?
What about his 30% larger heart? Training?
It is easy to find guilt when a Defendant is prohibited from producing a defense
THEY HAVE NO PROOF! They NEVER have had any. (Roger Clemens).
But sport is merely entertainment. If a 'Professional' athlete wants to increase his RBC count, take iron supplements, inject anabolic steroids, and he understands the risks, then let him. Isn't the goal bigger, faster, stronger?
I understand the inherent risks associated with these practices, and I wouldn't want to see young amateurs subjecting themselves to harm, but if a 'Professional' athlete wants to assume these risks for financial gain and to better entertain the people that like to see 500 foot home runs and 100 yards punts, and 400 yard drives, then let him. It's just entertainment. Don't take it so seriously that your head explodes.
How the witch hunt was conducted.
The entire article is built on “May”, “Could”, “If”, “Might”.
Sounds like they dreamed up ways someone might have beaten the tests then decided Armstrong must have done it.
Because after all, he kept winning, didn’t he?
I’ll grant there are plenty of exceptions, but as a group, there aren’t many folks more self-righteous than cyclists. I find it amusing that at the highest level they may all be cheats.
They broke the rules and if they all are using, none of them has any integrity. Hey I can win Monopoly if I say I get to move the number of spaces I need to get to Park Avenue and not the number the die says I get to move.
you know, if they just want to ride the route and not follow the rules, they don’t have to apply to follow the rules. just be like “professional” wrestling, ride the route fast and say you are better than the ones that adhered to the rules.
Not all, according to this commenter to a recent article who makes a valid point:
bigmountainsmallman Mon, 2012-08-27 13:28
“Lance is a cheater. Please stop glorifying the cheater. Lance and company stole the dreams of cyclists who are honest and wouldn’t cheat. It often meant leaving the sport, which many talented and honest riders did, or racing at a lower level and making very little money despite the same sacrifices, or sticking to a cleaner part of the sport like mountain biking. The honest cyclists train just as hard as the cheaters, and some likely also have the “tactical savvy, skill, and other elusive qualities only the greatest of champions possess” they just don’t have that extra “Euro gear” that cheaters like Lance and company made necessary to compete. Oh, and honest cyclists are completely ignored by Bicycling.com while cheaters are glorified.”
Armstong’s biggest problem here was himself. He was (and is) just a vindictive asshole. You have to be a really big jerk to come off that way in your own autobiography. Had he been a likeable person who demonstrated fierce loyalty to his team members and staff over the years, they would have kept their mouths shut and fought to support him. As it ended up, they couldn’t trip over themselves fast enough to turn him in.
I say this as a huge Armstrong fan, and an avid cyclist myself. If anything, he leveled the playing field for himself by using these substances as the sport is rife with it. But Armstrong in the end was his own worst enemy.
No proof !?
He tested +, read their report.
No proof!?
26 individuals` legal affidavits and + tests would convict anyone in legal jurisprudence. Let him sue for defamtaion. I`ll bet 1 G he won`t or if he does will fail.
I`m ashamed that so called “freepers” are acting exactly like Obamabots, emoting not thinking.
a lot of allegations and theory but no proof at all. doesn’t seem right
500 tests is an inflated number put out by Armstrong’s people as part of a PR campaign.
Armstrong isn’t unique in having a large heart. It’s common in elite cyclists.
http://sports.espn.go.com/oly/cycling/news/story?id=3002830
They will void them because the guys that finished 2nd in every one all eventually tested positive in a drug test.
It’s become a sick obsession. Vast conspiracies, endless “investigations”, conviction upon accusation, a 1000 page report! No wonder Armstrong says “Enough!”
He would have had over 100 in the TDF alone assuming he was leading 15 stages on average for just his 7 TDF wins. Count all the other races and the number of times in the off season and that number can add up very very fast. Not to mention that the USADA could easily refute the number to take away the PR.
Did you read all the evidence and testimony in the report???
Nothing but a waste of taxpayer money to illegally target a private citizen for government slander.
Best estimates put the number of times Armstrong has been tested in the mid-200’s. That’s a far cry from the 500-600 number that people use to try to prop up Armstrong’s crumbling reutation.
It’s not taxpayer money. Here’s what wiki says:
In October 1999, the USOC created the USADA to begin operation in October 2000. USADA’s status and alleged independence from the USOC contrasts the norm in the United States in which most professional sport organizations (MLB, NFL, NBA, NHL) manage the anti-doping aspects of their sports. As a result of USADA’s ongoing multi-year contracts with the USOC and the sport national governing bodies (USA Track & Field, USA Cycling, USA Swimming, US Soccer, etc.) the agency is responsible for managing the anti-doping programs including testing and results management for each sport’s athletes and events throughout the year. Despite its name and status as the country’s official anti doping organization, USADA is a private organization and not subject to government oversight.
Now the 32 million dollars that LA and his team were paid by the USPS over just 4 years — that was taxpayer money.
“Now the 32 million dollars that LA and his team were paid by the USPS over just 4 years — that was taxpayer money.”
That’s a bit misleading. It wasn’t tax money. It was money raised by the USPS through other means. Technically money that belonged to the citizenry though. Maybe a distinction without a difference.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.