USADA: Lance to get life ban, lose 7 titles

[ChosenOne]

AUSTIN, Texas -- The U.S. Anti-Doping Agency said Thursday night it will strip Lance Armstrong of his unprecedented seven Tour de France titles after he declared he was finished fighting the drug charges that threaten his legacy as one of the greatest cyclists of all time.

 

Travis Tygart, USADA's chief executive, said Armstrong would also be hit with a lifetime ban on Friday.

 

Still to be heard from was the sport's governing body, the International Cycling Union, which had backed Armstrong's legal challenge to USADA's authority.

 

Armstrong, who retired last year, declined to enter USADA's arbitration process -- his last option -- because he said he was weary of fighting accusations that have dogged him for years. He has consistently pointed to the hundreds of drug tests that he has passed as proof of his innocence during his extraordinary run of Tour titles stretchingfrom1999-2005.

 

"There comes a point in every man's life when he has to say, 'Enough is enough.' For me, that time is now," Armstrong said in a statement sent to The Associated Press. He called the USADA investigation an "unconstitutional witch hunt."

 

"I have been dealing with claims that I cheated and had an unfair advantage in winning my seven Tours since 1999," he said. "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."

 

ESPN

[NomarFachix]

Kind of a ridiculous witch hunt. I hate shit like this.

[Jenneral]

Unless I'm mistaken... he never actually tested positive did he?

[NomarFachix]

Unless I'm mistaken... he never actually tested positive did he?

Nope, and he can blame ex-teammate Floyd Landis for all this BS, he tried to drag the whole team down with him when he tested positive in what, '06?

[Sħãlïq™]

Unless I'm mistaken... he never actually tested positive did he?

(...) On May 20, 2010, former U.S. Postal teammate Floyd Landis accused Armstrong of doping in 2002 and 2003, and claimed that U.S. Postal team director Johan Bruyneel had bribed former UCI president Hein Verbruggen to keep quiet about a positive Armstrong test in 2002.[82][83] Landis admitted there was no documentation that supports these claims.[84] However, in July 2010 the president of the UCI, Pat McQuaid, revealed that Armstrong made two donations to the UCI: $25,000 in 2002, used by the juniors anti-doping program, and $100,000 in 2005, to buy a blood testing machine, and documentation of those payments does exist.

 

(...)1999 Tour de France urine testsOn August 23, 2005, L'Équipe, a major French daily sports newspaper, reported on its front page under the headline "le mensonge Armstrong" ("The Armstrong Lie") that 6 urine samples taken from the cyclist during the prologue and five stages of the 1999 Tour de France, frozen and stored since at "Laboratoire national de dépistage du dopage de Châtenay-Malabry" (LNDD), had tested positive for erythropoietin (EPO) in recent retesting conducted as part of a research project into EPO testing methods (...)

 

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lance_armstrong

Edited August 24, 2012 by Sħãlïq̵'

[Jenneral]

Nope, and he can blame ex-teammate Floyd Landis for all this BS, he tried to drag the whole team down with him when he tested positive in what, '06?

Wow. Ridiculous that after all his passed tests and all these years that they're still going after him.

 

The man's been through a lot in his life. People are going to consider him "guilty" now simply because he's choosing to give up on his fight for innocence... but really, after all these years what's the point anymore? Having cancer was probably hard enough on him and his family but having this constant witch-hunt to prove him as a cheater has to be absolutely draining.

[Sħãlïq™]

USADA: Lance to get life ban, lose 7 titles

NOOOOOOOOOOOO!!! This SUCKS big time....

[Jenneral]

I remember him saying somewhere that if they ever tried to strip his titles he'd sue... this will be interesting to see how it all plays out.

[ChosenOne]

Kind of a ridiculous witch hunt. I hate shit like this.

 

Exactly what it was.

[Need4Sheed]

It's ok guys. I'll be fine.

[Smitty]

It's ok guys. I'll be fine.

 

 

lmao

[Nitro]

I don't understand how they can strip him of 7 titles and give him a lifetime ban when he has never failed a test for doping.

 

One of the most retarded things I've ever heard, especially considering this guy gave cycling such crazy exposure for so many years. He's done too much for the sport to be treated like this without any proof of wrong-doing.

[TheNotoriousBANG]

Barry Bonds never failed a test either.......

[NomarFachix]

Barry Bonds never failed a test either.......

You're exactly right, and his was similarly a witch hunt.

[Jesse The Body]

Who knows maybe he did take and they finally caught him and they probably made a deal with him telling him to just stop fighting this or they will expose him to the public? Maybe same thing happen to Bonds as well? But people like more Armstrong then Bonds so they don't give a [expletive] about Bonds compare to Armstrong.

[EastCoastNiner]

The retardation is strong in this thread.

 

Yes, I would agree that it has been somewhat of a witch-hunt, but there is LOTS of evidence against him.

 

 

Many cyclists stopped using EPO in the late 90's when cycling was cracking down on usage. However, it wasn't tested then. However, Lance decided to chance it, and kept using. Years later samples of his from 1999 were tested, and he tested positive for EPO in 1999, when testing was not used.

 

Cycling is the dirtiest sport in the entire world, and if you're going to try and commend him on his "Livestrong" charity/scam, then you're an absolute joke. He cheated and exploited people. He's a cheat, and a narcissistic prick.

[Jesse The Body]

The retardation is strong in this thread.

 

Yes, I would agree that it has been somewhat of a witch-hunt, but there is LOTS of evidence against him.

 

 

Many cyclists stopped using EPO in the late 90's when cycling was cracking down on usage. However, it wasn't tested then. However, Lance decided to chance it, and kept using. Years later samples of his from 1999 were tested, and he tested positive for EPO in 1999, when testing was not used.

 

Cycling is the dirtiest sport in the entire world, and if you're going to try and commend him on his "Livestrong" charity/scam, then you're an absolute joke. He cheated and exploited people. He's a cheat, and a narcissistic prick.

 

Beautiful! I always senses there was something fishy about him. But I don't care to do research on him nor the sport of cycling, but it won't surprise me if this is true. He just seems like a shady character and specially Bonds!

[EastCoastNiner]

I don't like the witch-hunt, but what I like even less is people who exploit others, and that's what his foundation has done. He's set up two completely different sites, livestrong.com and livestrong.org, one of which is non-profit and one of which is not.

 

Very little of what is donated actually goes towards research.

 

 

Fraud, fraud, fraud!

[NomarFachix]

Years later samples of his from 1999 were tested, and he tested positive for EPO in 1999, when testing was not used.

Which he had a doctors prescription for and the offense was dropped.

[NomarFachix]

Pretty solid read.

 

It's an extrajudicial process.

 

It's essentially a private organization making its own rules, so the Federal court ruled that they didn't have jurisdiction. Kind of like if a private school gives you a punishment for running in the halls even though you didn't; none of that is up to the courts.

 

Everyone KNOWS he won the titles, so "stripping" him of them is basically saying "nuh-uh!"

 

Also the UCI (International Cycling Union) disagrees with USADA, and it's only because of some very poorly-thought-out reciprocal agreements that this can even happen.

 

Basically WADA has agreements with the major sports bodies, but then ALSO gave all its "franchises" (each country's __ADA) its same powers, meaning that ANY franchisee in ANY country can start proceedings against anyone anywhere, regardless of their ability to defend themselves in that venue.

 

USADA started this off with banning several doctors and staff who are EUROPEAN CITIZENS for life because they didn't respond within 5 days or whatever the requirement is to this U.S.-based inquisition.

 

And yes, "franchise" is correct because this operation was run not by some officer of the law, but the CEO of USADA. Travis Tygart has had it in for Lance for a long time; when Floyd Landis was busted, Tygart offered him a sweet deal if he would dish dirt on Lance.

 

The Department of Justice actually ran a Grand Jury investigation for 2 years before dropping the case in February -- apparently, someone eventually realized that winning the first 6 tours in a row for the US Postal Service wasn't "defrauding" them of their sponsorship dollars. Some of the people called to testify are still active riders in the pro peloton, which are presumably in the "10+ witnesses" Tygart would call on, which means he didn't care about ACTIVE riders who were part of the same alleged doping ring; he just cared about trying to destroy public opinion about Lance, who was retired from cycling and last won in 2005.

 

Lance didn't have the option of a trial, only binding arbitration with a 3-person panel. Binding arbitration is bad enough for your cell phone contract, but imagine it applying to your job -- and not just to your current job, but a LIFETIME ban on working at all in your entire field.

 

And even if you win, it's not until after USADA has dragged your name through the mud, issues press releases about their allegations, makes false claims, and then publishes a report with all the allegations and dirt to further hurt your public image, and nothing prevents them from doing it all again later. (One of USADA's pieces of "evidence" was the biological passport values from the 2009-2010 comeback which fluctuated, which an expert in a Cycling News report already said could fluctuate from either doping OR natural causes; but USADA trumpeted that it automatically meant cheating. It's pre-trial by Press Release, without expert testimony.)

 

USADA can essentially end the career of anyone it chooses to at any time, based on its own say-so, from riders to doctors all the way down to support staff. This is incredible leverage it can use to compel a "witness" to testify the way it wants them to.

 

This isn't even comparable to prosecutors using deals to get small fish to testify against a bigger fish, because not only are there no juries or judicial oversight, but this private organization DOESN'T need to prove anything -- they can stop you from competing immediately by simply opening an investigation.

 

Lance was about to run Ironman France when Tygart announced the investigation, which immediately suspended Lance from being able to compete at all, anywhere, indefinitely. If he wanted, he could wait until the day before a grand tour to suspend his alleged witnesses, leaving their teams scrambling, and keep them suspended for the entire racing season. This is enormous leverage and doesn't require a single doping test.

 

So it isn't enough to pass the tests and never be sanctioned for a doping violation; they can unilaterally decide to ban you for life anyway, so what's the point of the tests?

 

There are people who just competed in this year's Tour de France, and who are competing right now in the Vuelta a España (Tour of Spain), who HAVE been sanctioned for doping violations, yet are still allowed to ride.

 

Besides the two expected witnesses who perjured themselves so badly that they would be completely unusable in an actual courtroom (Floyd Landis and Tyler Hamilton), another of the pieces of so-called "evidence" that Tygart wanted to use was 6 urine samples from the 1999 Tour de France, a case which had already been investigated by the UCI's own appointee, and it EXONERATED Lance. The investigator was the director of the Netherlands national anti-doping organization, and wrote in his exhaustive, 132-page report:

 

the failure of the underlying research to comply with any applicable standard and the deficiencies in the report render it completely irresponsible for anyone involved in doping control testing to even suggest that the analyses results that were reported constitute evidence of anything.

 

(p. 17) PDF link: http://autobus.cyclingnews.com/news/2006/jun06/vrijmanreport.pdf

 

It was an epic beatdown. WADA screamed bloody murder, even though under their own regulations, they had stored the samples under the agreement they would never be used for sanctions of any kind!

 

Since the samples were EXPLICITLY not to be used for sanctions, they didn't follow the chain-of-custody regulations, were NOT anonymous, and sat in a freezer for 6 years that was accessible like any other research materials to any number of people.

 

Chain of custody is ESSENTIAL to handling samples, and it is already established in every context that a broken chain of custody equals completely worthless non-evidence.

 

This would be like if the cops impounded your car, then sold it at auction, and then 6 years later whoever is driving it gets pulled over, cops search the car, find drugs, and then want to charge YOU. It was obviously out of their "secure" impound facility the entire time, and the drugs could have come from anywhere -- including being forgotten by the cops after using the vehicle in an undercover sting operation (which I seem to recall actually happening in a story covered by Reddit).

 

Moreover, the French national anti-doping lab in question regularly leaks its findings to the French paper L'Equipe, which has a notorious anti-Lance POV (they really didn't like him winning their tour every single year).

 

This would be something like if you went for a drug test for your job, and before anyone else got the official results, your worst enemy on Facebook posted the "results" given to him from his buddy at the lab that coincidentally showed you used certain substances that were also sitting in the lab research supplies. Let's see, people with a motive and a grudge who have access to your samples with no chain of custody and know exactly which samples are yours and suddenly find a "positive" years after the fact?

 

As a cyclist, Lance's Tour de France years were under the auspices of the UCI, which claimed sole jurisdiction over this case, which USADA ignored because they could use their WADA connection as a loophole. The UCI also has an 8-year statute of limitations, and doesn't vacate titles after that even if doping is ADMITTED later, as happened some years back with 1996 winner Bjarne Riis who runs Team Saxo Bank. Jonathan Vaughters just admitted to doping and he runs Team Garmin.

 

But USADA is now trying to ban the director of Lance's team, who ISN'T an admitted doper, solely because of his connection to Lance. Tygart wants to claim it was a conspiracy and the whole team was doped up, yet curiously is not trying to stop any of the OTHER ex-teammate riders he claims were cheating just like Lance, and who are still competing, presumably in exchange for their testimony.

 

This seemingly violates USADA's charter, as it is charged with stopping doping, yet is letting CURRENT riders continue on just to nail someone who RETIRED from cycling and last won 7 years ago.

 

The whole process is the definition of a kangaroo court. The anti-doping agencies ONLY get clout and increase their budgets by busting people; if busts don't happen, people will begin wondering what the point of the doping agencies IS, exactly. There's no bigger fish than Lance, so CEO Tygart is probably counting on a big fat funding increase next year based on being able to abuse power like this.

 

Imagine how much fear he will be able to strike into athletes' hearts AFTER this, twirling his moustache and swinging his riding crop about, as he struts about imperiously: "I am zee one who took down Lance, you think I cannot take down you?" (Cue evil laugh)

 

There are no effective safeguards for athletes. Tiger Woods left college early because he couldn't stomach the arrogance and control exercised by the NCAA. Basically anyone in a position of power wants to use it, and it's always for something bad -- without them, you'd just do whatever you were going to do ANYWAY, so the powers are exclusively negative. They can't exercise their power by giving you the ability to play ball; they can only exercise their power by taking that ability away.

 

Contrary to the assertion that Lance "accepted" USADA's decision, he instead refused to go into binding arbitration with Travis Tygart, refusing to acknowledge the CEO of USADA's personal vendetta as legitimate. Both Lance and the UCI agree that the UCI is the only legitimate party with jurisdiction, as the UCI has announced publicly.

[Sħãlïq™]

It's ok guys. I'll be fine.

[EastCoastNiner]

Pretty solid read.

 

Strong bias.

 

Strong conspiracy theorist.

 

 

 

Sorry, but it's blatantly obvious that Lance is a complete and utter cheater. That doesn't mean most other cyclists aren't, but most articles and quotes I've read from people involved with cycling believe Lance is a fraud beyond a shadow of a doubt.

 

Not to mention you trying to say he was doping because of his cancer. . What a joke.

[NomarFachix]

Strong bias.

 

Strong conspiracy theorist.

Stong "I'm going to argue the opposite of how everyone feels, because I'm Skip Bayless" stance.

 

Sorry, but it's blatantly obvious that Lance is a complete and utter cheater. That doesn't mean most other cyclists aren't, but most articles and quotes I've read from people involved with cycling believe Lance is a fraud beyond a shadow of a doubt.

Wrong.

 

Not to mention you trying to say he was doping because of his cancer. . What a joke.

Wrong again:

In the 1999 steroid case, Lance’s doctors produced a legal corticosteroid prescription for saddle sores.

[EastCoastNiner]

Stong "I'm going to argue the opposite of how everyone feels, because I'm Skip Bayless" stance.

 

 

Wrong.

 

 

Wrong again:

 

Did you even read your own articles? He tested positive for EPO. That's what's being talked about. You can claim the "B" sample was tainted, but he tested positive for it, which has absolutely nothing at all to do with your "doctors" prescription.

 

The author of the same article you're quoting from pretty much thinks he's a cheater by the comments he made. You're going to continue to try and claim his "doctors" prescription is what triggered the test, but that's NOT what the EPO test was from.

 

Not to mention more recent tests in 2009 have found extremely similar findings.

Edited August 26, 2012 by EastCoastNiner

[NomarFachix]

He tested positive for EPO.

The EPO he was legally prescribed? Strong logic.

 

Not to mention more recent tests in 2009 have found extremely similar findings.

Link me to his failed tests.