Comments on: The Explainer: What crimes could federal investigators charge against Lance Armstrong?

By: gcmccc56

gcmccc56 — Fri, 03 Sep 2010 09:01:44 +0000

I couldn't agree more. I'm interested in finding out the truth, you can't move on without doing so at this point. I'm afraid the truth just withers and dies in the face of the spin doctors and philanthropy/character insurance. If LA is guilty of taking PED's then he has helped destroy the sport of cycling more than he's helped sell bikes and biking to the american public. What a scar if the greatest tour winner in history turns out to be a cheat that served himself and attacked those who questioned his methods or even discussed the issue of drugs in cycling as a general concern. LA was unquestionably the boss one those teams, and if he supported/encouraged doping or facilitated funding doping, he should be brought to justice. LA spins the whole issue into a case of don't talk about it because you are bringing “cycling” down – when the most accurate translation may be: “don't talk about it because you are bringing me (LA) down. He could have been a champion for a clean sport in addition to a champion rider… but he didn't even try. To all those claims that without LA the sport wouldn't exist in America, i think that's deluded. Look at how many people have expressed admiration and sorrow at Fignon's passing…and what he meant to people here in the USA. The sport and its followers are bigger than LA by a long shot. Thank goodness for that.

By: whytheFbother

whytheFbother — Mon, 30 Aug 2010 05:17:54 +0000

I understand he “Probably” was involved in on way or another. My problem is the fact that the government with spend many millions of dollars on this investigation. Are the American people better off because of this investigation? Probably not. It will just take more of our hard earned tax dollars, and what do we (the American people) gain by this? Nothing. Will a prosecutor and an investigator get a big name and write a book and make a Lifetime movie network movie from this? Probably. Will Greg LeMond be in more glory than when he won the tour? Yes Probably. Oh, and Floyd Landis. Will we believe Floyd and everything he says? NO! So, what is the point? Lower my taxes, and get on with our lives.

By: VeloAsia

VeloAsia — Mon, 30 Aug 2010 04:24:03 +0000

I totally disagree with the idea if someone got away with something, then let sleeping dogs lie. It's all the more reprehensible if someone has not only done wrong but to attack others who would accuse you. Many here defended Landis hook, line and sinker all through his ugly crusade.

But back to the ideas that is the past, or Lance has done good things, so let it go. This is a classic slippery slope argument, one that if let run its course may have let the likes of a Nixon or even a Hitler be given a pass. Certainly many made the same arguments for O.J. during his trial and that creep, Rod Blagojevic, still has an astonishing amount of supporters in Illinois.

If you feel letting Lance off constitutes fair judgement because it's old news or he has done so much for others, that is your opinion and is not at all shared by me. If the law is broken, I'm even more for the rich and powerful being brought to justice. If you travel long enough, you'd know this is a unique concept as American as Lance is and what separates our country from much of the world where justice for the rich and powerful is a mirage

By: whytheFbother

whytheFbother — Mon, 30 Aug 2010 01:17:54 +0000

By: VeloAsia

VeloAsia — Mon, 30 Aug 2010 00:24:03 +0000

By: William W

William W — Sun, 22 Aug 2010 03:37:34 +0000

They're spending money investigating this, unbelievable, WHO CARES

By: wesnoel

wesnoel — Sat, 14 Aug 2010 13:05:26 +0000

Those who complain that the recent doping in the tour obviously have not read anything about the event. Doping has existed since the first race through this year's event. Those who have refrained are among the vast minority, not majority. Without LA, this sport's coverage would again be non-existent. Regardless of his personal income, Livestrong has helped raise awareness of the terrible effects of cancer in the lives of thousands Americans. As far as I'm concerned, LA could be a piano player in a whore house and as long as the organization that he founded continues to help the individuals concerned in the incredible suffering of this disease, he should be applauded for his humanitarian work.

By: David Kerr

David Kerr — Sat, 07 Aug 2010 15:35:00 +0000

NO! IF and that is if, all this turns out to be true, then Phinney needs to be on Radio Shack to show a clean image. There is a lot of talent coming up in the Shack team that will need a strong leader and a talented one. If all this is true based on a confirmed liar and former “star” with a grudge, then okay, lets move on. Radio Shack is a strong team, they did win the TDF, that is no small task and to disband it at this point on words alone is rash. Remember, we were not there. If the ones in the room when the needles were stuck in won’t say, I’m not guessing on the word if a confirmed liar who is basing his word on conversations.

By: Brian G

Brian G — Sat, 07 Aug 2010 03:12:25 +0000

“But Lance has done more for the sport of cycling in the USA then any other human being. The number of cycling fans who are fans just because of Lance are easily into 7 digits. He's a humanitarian, but let's face it he's a rich humanitarian. But the people in cycling are all more than a little richer thanks to the increased revenue Lance has brought the sport.”So here is what pisses me off more than anything some scum bag that rapes or even kills some one gets off only to try again, Lance has done more good whith what he has done and how he has done ti bigger than any other athlete of our time and honestly I want to know why we are waisting or taxpaying money to screw a guy that has done more good for millions and that from the outset wanted to win to spread a message what a bunch of sleazy pencil neck loozer geek government hack jobs, go after Soros!

By: Scott

Scott — Fri, 06 Aug 2010 19:05:51 +0000

The interesting point here, which I have not seen much discussion of is that if LA is innocent, its really easy to defend. Floyd tells stories where 3-10 people are involved. If the bus incident is false then it would be very easy to get all the riders on postal to say so as there is no penalty to telling the truth about nothing wrong going on. If he cant get 5 or 6 people to say it didn't happen, then it probably happened. Most of the other incidents involved at least 1 other rider, or his wife, or other witnesses. If LA cannot get them to come forward to clear his name, its because they don't want to lie, or they all hate him.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Fri, 06 Aug 2010 16:18:00 +0000

Insofar as humanitarianism isn’t really defined by what percentage of one’s income is proferred to a cause, Armstrong’s humanitarianism is beyond reproach. I agree that he’s made money through Livestrong, but the only fact germaine to the humanitarian conversation is that cancer research is light years ahead of where it would have been without Armstrong’s participation.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Fri, 06 Aug 2010 00:55:00 +0000

very very well said…

By: xntrick

xntrick — Thu, 05 Aug 2010 19:12:00 +0000

“The generation of dopers is over, and bike racing will be much better for it.”

that’s what they said when Festina was kicked out of the 1998 tour, and when Lance won in ’99 he was heralded as the “clean” image of the sport..i myself find it hard to believe that LA would’ve doped back in ’99 considering how close he came to death and after the Festina scandal took place…

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Wed, 04 Aug 2010 19:41:00 +0000

Here are Lance’s testing from the UCI, How does this add up to 500 tests?

1999 : 15 contrôles urinaires

2000 : 12 contrôles urinaires

2001 : 10 contrôles urinaires

2002 : 9 contrôles urinaires

2003 : 9 contrôles urinaires

2004 : 8 contrôles urinaires

By: Greg Gilbert

Greg Gilbert — Wed, 04 Aug 2010 19:25:00 +0000

that is only for the times the US ADA tested him. If he was tested in another country, or as part of a race it wouldn’t be counted in that number. Remember he was tested after every stage in every stage race that he either won or was wearing the leaders jersey in. Those tests obviously are not listed in the numbers you posted.

By: bandopers4life

bandopers4life — Wed, 04 Aug 2010 15:40:01 +0000

Very well written insight. Thanks for posting this.

By: Steve Gradhandt

Steve Gradhandt — Wed, 04 Aug 2010 14:19:50 +0000

lance story and speculation as to possible charges.

By: miguelstonecrow

miguelstonecrow — Wed, 04 Aug 2010 03:26:09 +0000

I am a trial lawyer and I think it unlikely that there will be a conviction of Armstrong, even though I believe there is abundant direct and circumstantial evidence that he doped. But I think that the gathering of evidence, the probable indictment and ensuing motions will serve to rip the facade away from Armstrong and convince most logical people in the court of public opinion that Armstrong was a cheat, regardless of the likelihood that many against whom he competed also doped. (ex. Barry Bonds will stand trial on perjury, not using drugs, but is there anyone who still believes that he broke all those records while clean? His legacy is forever tarnished.) When all is said and done with this investigation only the willfully ignorant will still believe that Armstrong was clean.

That said, I think there is tremendous public benefit for revealing Armstrong as a scoundrel. Most importantly it is about the future generations. I have two sons, 6th grade, and they love riding - they speed up Cat. 2 climbs and are looking for even harder hills. I would steer them away from competitive riding, because at some point they will have to make a decision regarding PEDs - the use of PEDs simply provides too great an advantage, and a mediocre clean rider can beat a great clean rider. The health and legal risks are too great, even if it means a shot a becoming a professional athlete. Nevertheless, I believe society has great interest exposing sports frauds so that it will discourage otherwise good kids from doping. (Having read David Walsh's book, one becomes aware of the tremendous health risk to those who use PEDs. For every successful user there many more who are dead, or sick.) Is it "worth the taxpayer's money?" Hell yeah.

I believe that another benefit will be to recover and preserve the great history and legacy of the Tour de France. While the Tour's history is littered with cheats, it is of great importance to know who cheated and who was clean - as far as we can tell through all the tests, inquisitions, investigations and trials.

It's a bummer that most of the great riding I've seen in the Tour was done by doped up cheats. I rode up Hautacam in '96 (took about an hour, had a blast) and saw Riis fly by, followed by Virenque. I am gratified that we now know that these great feats were just another cheating performance. That day was Indurain's birthday, and he finished a coupla minutes behind. Indurain was a noble rider and I wonder to this day whether he doped. As compared to Armstrong, there is little or no direct evidence against Indurain, but there is circumstantial. After all, he trained with Dr. Conconi, the father of modern doping, and Ferrari was his apprentice. But, to me, the Tour is above all else, about beauty. No amount of dope can destroy the beauty of the event. The refs try hard to kick out the cheats, the result is often tarnished by cheats, but without exception, from a fan's point of view, a "good time was had by all" all the time. Vive Le Tour.

At the core is cheating, so prevalent in America (and other places.) As I wrote above, I'm a lawyer, and there are (distressingly) many, many lawyers who cheat and lie as a matter of doing business. Most of them are never caught, but those who are caught are ruined and dragged in front of the media to scare other lawyers and to make the public believe that the system is not as crooked as it is. As with the UCI, there are many corrupt judges in our legal system, so really what is needed is institutional revolution. Good luck on that. But at least, with a little luck, we can save some young athletes from taking bad risks.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Mon, 02 Aug 2010 12:13:00 +0000

Actually, Landis testified before an arbitration board in California for his hearing and his appeal (if I recall correctly) was heard in New York. He took an oath and could be subject to perjury statutes, but I’m hard-pressed off the top of my head to say whether he would be subject to criminal sanction under state or federal law.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Mon, 02 Aug 2010 03:44:00 +0000

Another Lance “blinded” fan WADA and UCI testing is BS Major leage baseball testers give the teams 24 hour notice by “requesting parking passes” for test day wink wink. have 3rd party testing done by multiple parties. the twitter by lance when the tester showed up after a recon ride right befoe the tour i think he said “thanks for the notice” i thought they were suppose to be unannounced drug tests?