Armstrong to be stripped of all Tour de France wins
Tagged: pauth smith sa
Lance should get the Barry Bonds asterisk. Maybe carry the shame on a scarlet pie plate? Pie plates are pro.
Nike dropping him makes this hurt Lance where it actually hurts him, his wallet.
brianj: I wonder if LA is preparing to “come clean” and throw a bunch of other people other the bus to make himself look like a bit of victim.
I think that’s spot on. If there is such a thing as a “they” with a “goal”, try this narrative on: they want Lance to give up ASO and UCI and expose systematic, corporate profiteering and explicit hypocrisy.
And I don’t think Lance has a history of taking a beating for anybody else’s benefit. It might be that “interesting” hasn’t even started yet.
You guys are living in a dream world. Lance is not going to admit to anything. He’s already lost everything he’s going to lose — trophies, endorsements, his foundation. Why would he publicly admit what he’s been denying for years? What would he gain? He’s not going to get anything back. And as long as he keeps denying it he’ll still have a few people fooled, and be able to pretend to himself, if no one else, that he’s innocent.
I don’t know. I wonder if the USADA would consider lifting the ban if LA gave up names/sources. Would be interesting to know if there are any offers/deals like this on the table for him. Doing so might allow him to return to the sport(s) even if it is with a tarnished name.
He retired from cycling and took up triathlons, again. There was a lot of speculation about him giving the rest of the pro field a run for their money in the world championship. Lifting the ban would allow for his return to triathlons and open up the possibility for him to coach/manage a team later in life as well.
Maurice Garin, who won the first-ever TdF in 1903, got caught riding the train in 1904.
Besides, who’s left that hasn’t already been implicated to be thrown under the bus?
If you look at this diagram from the New York Times it doesn’t look that impossible to find other winners:
It looks to me like you could get a replacement for TdF winner from the top three finishers in every year except 2003 and 2005. But maybe the other competitors are dirty too and not shown in this diagram; does anyone know?
Besides, who’s left that hasn’t already been implicated to be thrown under the bus?
The UCI. All LA needs to say is “yeah, I paid off McQuaid and Verbruggen to cover up doping positives.”
LMFAO — what is worse, cheating by riding the train, or riding the snake?
Exactly. If he told them who gave him advanced warnings on when tests would be, to who he paid to cover it up within the organization, etc… Although at this point I think Lance is/was the biggest possible target.
Oh add Radioshack and Trek to the huge LA backers that have now dropped him.
Anonymous 10/18/2012 at 12:18am #
I can’t find the link but apparently even Nike paid off the former UCI president $500k to cover up a positive test in 1997(?). So them dropping Lance doesn’t clear their name yet either.
With LA stepping down from Livestrong does this bring some legitimacy back to the organization? I know there are some issues with it outside of LA, but it seems people have issues with all of the big cancer organizations. Is there any saving Livestrong? I’m hoping that without LA’s involvement maybe something good still can come out of it.
Also my most comfortable cycling kit, helmet, and sunglasses are Livestrong (and expensive) I really don’t want to wast such good equipment. But it feels awkward wearing it because people think it’s in support of LA, but I purchased it because I work in oncology.
Anonymous 10/18/2012 at 1:37pm #
Mr. Marv, I wouldn’t worry about the kit, fortunately you are in the city of black and yellow.
@W Roger mr Marv: they don’t even donate to research anymore
As a medical statistician, Livestrong (uh … DopeStrong?) not giving to research is fine with me.
“NCI’s budget for FY 2010 was $5.1 billion, excluding the additional $1.3 billion in American Recovery and Reinvestment Act funds received by the Institute for spending in FY 2009 and FY 2010.”
That is aside from massive civic charity donations (that mainly stays in massive civic charities, but…)
Armstrong’s cash is just a drop in the bucket for research.
Medical research charities have another problem, too, in my opinion. I just don’t think it’s appropriate for the charitable giving of folks like me should go to millionaire surgeons. When, after all, we could be giving to Bike Pgh.
I’m not an Armstrong fan (putting it mildly), but the mission of LiveStong as I see it – helping sick, worried, shell-shocked cancer patients navigate through the maze of bureaucracy the folks need to to find the numerous programs and funding available to them – is not only a valid goal, it’s a mission that does best with at BIG! NAME! attached to it.
There are some things Lance does very, very well. Being a BIG ! ! NAME ! ! ! is one of them.
Glad to provide the board with another fact bomb!
@ Mick I agree with you about Livestrong. It is a resource that is used often in my workplace. Example. Doctor recommends treatment. Patient doesn’t understand, is unsure, or unwilling. Printout info from Livestrong website. Same info as what doctor said but with so so much more info, resources, survivor testimonies, and other info. Helps patient make informed decision.
It seems sort of ironic that Livestrong ends up being used as a way to get people to use drug therapy. Perhaps Armstrong is a good spokesman after all.
Edit — didn’t mean to imply anything negative about cancer therapy involving drugs; if you can cure cancer via exercise that’s great. But I do know that drugs are sometimes involved.
Not just drugs but any treatment, even if its just exercise. Never said anything about drugs.
What I’m hoping for is a complete separation between LA and Livestrong. I’m hoping that Livestrong can become something major and relevant in the fight against cancer.
I’m also hoping that people understand the fact that all my Livestrong stuff was way to expensive and comfortable to stop wearing and not give me grief about it.
Anonymous 10/18/2012 at 11:15pm #
This whole thing is one big joke. Sure Lance did what they all did, or most likely. Who do you give those titles to? Jan? The entire field did the same crap. All this does is hurt Livestrong at this point. That calladeral damage is too great. If they had half a brain, they would have started over and forgot the past. What are they going to do, strip everyone that won since the 70’s? Do what football did. Just look forward and tell the riders, we aren’t messing around and mean it. You can’t go backwards. Lance’s career has been over for years. He won those tittles and that is that. They can’t give those titles to anyone else, because they have to check all that crap all the way down the line. I will bet the top 20 all were doping. Maybe everyone. This is poorly handled and is just making the sport a joke. Don’t dredge up old stuff. Start new and look forward.
Anonymous 10/19/2012 at 2:05am #
at the end of the day I’m still showing up to the first team decaf ride next year in full USPS kit. Those memories (as a very young kid) can’t ever be erased. I just can’t be mad. Its weird. Bonds, and Gatlin, and Armstrong can’t NOT be heroes in my mind. Not anymore at least.
Anonymous 10/19/2012 at 2:12am #
They were great Tours. I wanted Jan to win later, because I could related to some dude that drinks beer and eats pizza. He was much cooler than Lance, but I really respect Lance for pursuing a cancer cure through his foundation. Of course he has stepped down from that role and maybe the foundation will not be the same. All because of this witch hunt that went backwards. You can’t go that far back and change history. They should have caught him when he was racing, not several years later. He is the 7 time Tour Champ. Jan even said, I am happy with my second place finishes.
via NY publisher Melville House: Lance Armstrong gets reshelved. “A bookstore in Glasgow aims to add insult to injury by reclassifying [Armstrong’s] memoir Every Second Counts as fiction.”
I think we should stop tarring all the riders in the Tour de France with the same “doping” brush. Of course, we’ve heard in testimony from riders who were accused of doping, and who testified in exchange for leniency. But it’s unfair to the other riders who performed well to assume that they, too, doped and just didn’t get caught.
For example, in the notorious 1998 Tour Bobby Julich finished third and so far as I can tell from Internet search, didn’t dope. It really isn’t fair to assume he did, just because others did.
Anonymous 10/19/2012 at 4:01pm #
It is fun for people to try and topple the former world’s number one cyclist especially since he is an American and not from the UK. IMHO, it doesn’t add insult or anything really. The whole field was doing the same thing. Lance won the 7 regardless. His closest rival Jan even credits him and says he is happy with second. This is backwards and if you don’t catch someone when they are competing, sorry you lose. You just can rewrite history like that. Not to mention the amazing effort Lance has done for cancer. Of course he has now stepped down. Nice. Catch the athletes when they are competing, or shut up. There are no go backs. Who do the titles go to? Just say there was no tour since the 70’s? I guess that would be fair.
From the google:
“From Tyler Hamilton’s book, about the 1998 Festina Tour de France debacle and aftermath:
“The race was won by Marco Pantani, the Italian climber, and dominated by the French team Cofidis, whose riders took three of the top seven spots, with none other than Bobby Julich finishing third. Cofidis’s performance sparked rumors that the team had kept using EPO after the rest of the peloton had stopped; nothing was ever proven. The rest of us rode paniagua, dragged ass, survived.”
And there is a footnote to that passage:
“Cofidis’s 1998 performance was statistically unusual. Over the rest of their careers, the top four Cofidis finishers (Julich, Christophe Rinero, Roland Meier, and Kevin Livingston) rode the Tour a collective fifteen times, averaging 45th place.”
Smoke fire etc.”
Just look forward and tell the riders, we aren’t messing around and mean it. You can’t go backwards.
the problem with this sentiment is that all it does is encourage riders to resort to greater measures to circumvent the rules. if you can only be caught the moment it happens, the rules prohibiting doping have no teeth. riders simply think, as lance did, great, i’ll just take something they can’t test for.
Anonymous 10/22/2012 at 12:48pm #
Anonymous 10/22/2012 at 1:27pm #
There really was no Tour back then I guess. Sure was fun to see Lance and Jan riding through the mountains. I was more of a Jan fan. Always like that style of drinking beer and eating pizza. Anyway, I am going to forget the Tour and not bother with it. I am not going to watch a race where they can go back in time and change everything. What would be the point? You catch the person while they are in the Tour or you don’t. There is going to be no winner during those years? What about back in the 70’s? 80’s? They didn’t use anything like other pro athletes?
Yeah, but what are you going to do? If, as it appears, Lance won partly or mostly because he was better at doping than others, well, are you just going to ignore it? He got away with it long enough, so let it go? That would send a pretty bad message to future competitors, wouldn’t it? This way everyone knows that even if they’re using something that no one can test for right now, as Lance and others were, they’re still at risk of losing everything if they dope. I think we want potential dopers to be thinking about that.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Click here to login.