Lance Amstrong

[John K]

After watching the 60 Minutes piece, does anyone still believe that Armstrong was clean when he was winning the Tour de France all those years? Unlike Floyd Landis, I thought that Tyler Hamilton was very credible. Maybe the most damning evidence, even though it's only circumstantial, is the fact that of the 14 riders who finished 2nd and 3rd during the 7 years that Armstrong won, all but one has subsequently been connected to performance enhancing drugs. You're telling me that in a sport where virtually everyone cheated, that the guy who dominated the sport was the only one who was clean? That seems unlikely.

[ilovethecats]

i believe that lance didn't use drugs the same way i believe that bonds didn't use drugs, oj didn't do it, and the griz fan base wouldn't change if they had several losing seasons.

[TIrwin24]

Hamilton's just trying to get publicity for his new book. He's been a confirmed liar for years.

I don't think Armstrong was doping.

[MashTun]

Hamilton's just trying to get publicity for his new book. He's been a confirmed liar for years.

I don't think Armstrong was doping.

I agree.

[SonomaCat]

He who has the best chemist wins.

[John K]

Hamilton's just trying to get publicity for his new book. He's been a confirmed liar for years.

I don't think Armstrong was doping.

I agree.

I would love to hear your rationale. I just don't understand how anyone can still believe he was clean. Virtually everyone in that sport used performance enhancing drugs, and yet we're supposed to believe that the only rider who didn't use them, was the guy who dominated the sport? That would be like believing that all the guys who were hitting 40 plus home runs were using PED, but the guys (Bonds and McGwire) who were hitting 70 plus home runs were clean. As Hamilton said, training just wasn't enough anymore, for those who really wanted to compete at the highest level. And how about Armstrong's "donations" to the anti-doping agency? That doesn't seem a bit suspicious to you?

[ilovethecats]

i want to believe that he didn't take ped's. i really do. he is a pretty likeable guy as far as i'm concerned. but i just don't see it. i just can't fathom that he's so much better than the other best riders in the world, that all of them were using ped's but he wasn't. especially after he came back from cancer. it's a great story. one that i want to believe....

[MashTun]

Hamilton's just trying to get publicity for his new book. He's been a confirmed liar for years.

I don't think Armstrong was doping.

I agree.

I would love to hear your rationale. I just don't understand how anyone can still believe he was clean. Virtually everyone in that sport used performance enhancing drugs, and yet we're supposed to believe that the only rider who didn't use them, was the guy who dominated the sport? That would be like believing that all the guys who were hitting 40 plus home runs were using PED, but the guys (Bonds and McGwire) who were hitting 70 plus home runs were clean. As Hamilton said, training just wasn't enough anymore, for those who really wanted to compete at the highest level. And how about Armstrong's "donations" to the anti-doping agency? That doesn't seem a bit suspicious to you?

I find it highly unlikely given the amount of times he was tested that he wouldn't have been caught.

He was subject to random tests in, and out of season. The leader of the TdF is tested everyday they wear the jersey. Plus random selections during the race. I'd wager his being from the USA, and pretty mouthy earlier in his career earned him some extra testing.

The 2001 test relative to the TdF has been disputed for years. It's a mute point now, since as I understand the backup sample is untestable.

As for Tyler's claims, I don't know. Why not come out before? Is it a coincidence that he has a book coming out soon? You tell me. He may have seen things as a US Postal rider. He was a top rider on those teams, so he may have been around Lance more often than lesser (newer) riders on the team. I don't know. I find it a little interesting those who are the most vocal about Lance doping are convicted dopers themselves. What other voices are speaking out? I hear Hincapie testified, but won't speak about his testimony. Not speaking in and of itself proves nothing. If George says he did it, then I am more inclined to believe it.

All this said I think it's pointless to go after him now. He has done so much for the sport and a the cancer community. Those pushing the issue now I strongly feel are just promoting a career, and taking down an icon is a great career move. Why not direct your efforts toward active riders/players, developing and installing testing to keep the sport clean now. Or how about working to change the culture of the sport, so that "racing clean" is the cool thing to do. BTW, I think the culture of the sport has changed increasingly to this thinking.

[technoCat]

Hamilton's just trying to get publicity for his new book. He's been a confirmed liar for years.

I don't think Armstrong was doping.

I agree.

I would love to hear your rationale. I just don't understand how anyone can still believe he was clean. Virtually everyone in that sport used performance enhancing drugs, and yet we're supposed to believe that the only rider who didn't use them, was the guy who dominated the sport? That would be like believing that all the guys who were hitting 40 plus home runs were using PED, but the guys (Bonds and McGwire) who were hitting 70 plus home runs were clean. As Hamilton said, training just wasn't enough anymore, for those who really wanted to compete at the highest level. And how about Armstrong's "donations" to the anti-doping agency? That doesn't seem a bit suspicious to you?

What could be better rationale than there not being ANY credible evidence that he did do it? He was tested like a billion times and the only people who seem to have witnessed any of it have either been caught themselves or are obviously just trying to make money off it. When Lance writes a book called "How I would have cheated, if I had, but I didn't", then I might believe he's guilty. Maybe Lance is just a freak of nature or he just trained better or harder than anyone else. There are plenty of ways he could have won without cheating. I don't know why people just refuse to let this go.

[ilovethecats]

bonds never tested positive either....

[SonomaCat]

If these guys are lying, then why hasn't Armstrong sued them for libel and slander? That way he could get them in court, under oath, and clear his name once and for all. It would be a slam dunk case. He could even take all of his proceeds from the verdict and donate them to some charity to look like an even bigger hero.

Why wouldn't he sue? They are destroying his brand and costing him millions of dollars in endorsements and potential career opportunities. It would be insane for him NOT to sue, wouldn't it?

[John K]

bonds never tested positive either....

'nuff said.

[John K]

If these guys are lying, then why hasn't Armstrong sued them for libel and slander? That way he could get them in court, under oath, and clear his name once and for all. It would be a slam dunk case. He could even take all of his proceeds from the verdict and donate them to some charity to look like an even bigger hero.

Why wouldn't he sue? They are destroying his brand and costing him millions of dollars in endorsements and potential career opportunities. It would be insane for him NOT to sue, wouldn't it?

Once again....'nuff said.

[technoCat]

bonds never tested positive either....

'nuff said.

Oh yeah, I forgot about when Lance's head swelled to three times its normal size and his chest got 15 inches bigger... jk

But seriously, when it was big in baseball, were they testing people constantly? Was it even technically against the rules? I just don't see how Lance could have gotten away with it every day when every tester in the world wanted to bring him down.

[ilovethecats]

again, i have no conspiracy theory against lance at all. even juiced up i think his feats were amazing. especially not that we know that nearly every other rider that could give him a run for his money was juicing. i'm a believer that where there is smoke there is fire. it just seems crazy to me that the one guy that dominated a sport was the one guy not using drugs. and i can't see what all these other cyclists have to gain by ratting him out. what is this now, 5 former riders that say they know he was doping? do they all have book deals? and even if they do, are we so quick to assume the worst of these guys before fathoming that a single rider may have taken ped's to get an edge?

and my pics with bonds weren't to say that lance was on steroids. there are many drugs out there besides steroids that are ped's. it was simply to state that bonds never once tested positive for drugs either. doesn't mean he didn't do them....

[John K]

bonds never tested positive either....

'nuff said.

Oh yeah, I forgot about when Lance's head swelled to three times its normal size and his chest got 15 inches bigger... jk

But seriously, when it was big in baseball, were they testing people constantly? Was it even technically against the rules? I just don't see how Lance could have gotten away with it every day when every tester in the world wanted to bring him down.

Armstrong is accused of blood doping, and taking EPO, not steroids. EPO and steroids are two completely different things. According to Hamilton, Lance knew exactly how much he could take without testing positive. And you never addressed my question about his "donations" to the anti-doping agency. That doesn't seem at all suspicious to you....not to mention unethical? Did you even see the 60 Minutes piece? Or are you just convinced that Armstrong is a saint and Hamilton is a liar, so "please don't confuse me with the facts"?

[John K]

Actually, I should have said "please don't confuse me with additional information". Obviously Hamilton's accusations can't be assumed to be factual, just as Armstrong's denials can't be assumed to be factual.

[TIrwin24]

If these guys are lying, then why hasn't Armstrong sued them for libel and slander? That way he could get them in court, under oath, and clear his name once and for all. It would be a slam dunk case. He could even take all of his proceeds from the verdict and donate them to some charity to look like an even bigger hero.

Why wouldn't he sue? They are destroying his brand and costing him millions of dollars in endorsements and potential career opportunities. It would be insane for him NOT to sue, wouldn't it?

I imagine that he has no interest in being held up in a court and having to pay huge amounts of money in legal fees.

Even if he is not at fault and wins, I think the earnings from said lawsuit would barely cover the cost of lost/wasted time and effort.

[SonomaCat]

If these guys are lying, then why hasn't Armstrong sued them for libel and slander? That way he could get them in court, under oath, and clear his name once and for all. It would be a slam dunk case. He could even take all of his proceeds from the verdict and donate them to some charity to look like an even bigger hero.

Why wouldn't he sue? They are destroying his brand and costing him millions of dollars in endorsements and potential career opportunities. It would be insane for him NOT to sue, wouldn't it?

I imagine that he has no interest in being held up in a court and having to pay huge amounts of money in legal fees.

Even if he is not at fault and wins, I think the earnings from said lawsuit would barely cover the cost of lost/wasted time and effort.

So you think it is more rational for him to instead have his entire future earning potential destroyed by the lies of others without taking any legal steps at all to stop it?

If it was financially feasible for Mike Kramer to advance a lawsuit of that kind, it would seem to be roughly 100 times more feasible for someone of a national stature like Armstrong to file that kind of lawsuit.

Not only would it have a huge financial impact for Armstrong (between the judgment and all of the career/endorsement opportunities that would open back up with full redemption in a court of law), it would also provide justice and clear his name for his legacy.

I doubt that Armstrong is either as apathetic or as financially illiterate as your theory would paint him as being.

[SonomaCat]

If I was Armstrong, and people were saying all these things about me, and none of them was true, I would have a team of attorneys working round the clock making sure that each and every one of them was sued for libel and slander:

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/24/sport ... arges.html

Because if these stories are proven to be false, everything he has ever accomplished and all of his future potential good work/earnings will be most likely be wiped out. In essence, it would destory him. Surely, no sane person would sit by and not fight back in the face of injustice that huge.