FootballNews

God is an Englishman wrote:

Chade wrote:

DOC wrote:what are you on about wraith? I asked for a positive test, i never defended him

And you were told about 3 of them, with references...

where?

wasn't he just given someone saying it had happened?

Chade wrote:I provided references and links. You're free to look it up yourself.

A truth that went overlooked in the debate over those [1999 TDF] samples is that in at least two samples, 100 percent of the protein isoforms in Armstrong’s electrophoresis gels were consistent with synthetic EPO. That means that he had taken so much EPO for long enough that his body basically shut down its own production; it didn’t even register on the test.

God is an Englishman wrote:

Chade wrote:I provided references and links. You're free to look it up yourself.

You don't keep a dog and bark yourself!

Who were the references from? Has any official body stated these positive tests happened?

Lance Armstrong and the cost-benefit analysis of confession
Don't be fooled: the only thing choking up Lance is the lawsuits he has to settle. But he'll recoup through Oprah's redemption

Chade wrote:http://bicycling.com/blogs/boulderrepor ... mfy-couch/

A truth that went overlooked in the debate over those [1999 TDF] samples is that in at least two samples, 100 percent of the protein isoforms in Armstrong’s electrophoresis gels were consistent with synthetic EPO. That means that he had taken so much EPO for long enough that his body basically shut down its own production; it didn’t even register on the test.

This is consistent with the French labs (that I've also quoted) re-testing Armstrong's 1999-2001 samples and finding him to be metaphorically reading off chart.

God is an Englishman wrote:

Chade wrote:I provided references and links. You're free to look it up yourself.

You don't keep a dog and bark yourself!

Keep dreaming, sunshine.

Who were the references from? Has any official body stated these positive tests happened?

Hurr derp. Yes. Go look it up. As to why they're not more public? That's sort of the point, and apparently partly why Armstrong is confessing; he's implied Hein Verbruggen and Pat McQuaid were involved in the overall scheme.

All these "born again" champions of a clean sport. They could be more accurately described as criminals who stole other's livelihoods who are only ever genuinely sorry about one thing — they are very sorry they were caught.

I do despair that the sport will ever clean itself up when the rewards of stealing are greater than riding clean. If that remains the case, the temptation for those with no morals will always be too great. Lyne summed it up quite nicely with a statement that won her few plaudits but was entirely right. I can't help thinking that the cheats win on the way up and the way down.

Tyler Hamilton will make more money from his book describing how he cheated than Bessette or I will make in all our years of our honest labour. The situation requires the very basics of morality. Please don't reward people like Hamilton with money. That is the last thing he needs. Donate his literary prize and subsequent earnings from such publications to a charity. There are many places infinitely more deserving than the filthy hands of Hamilton. I am happy to offer some ideas!

It is obvious that this issue is wider than the remit of the sporting governing bodies. It is no modest "sporting fraud". Wider society has to act.

I have ridden through some of the darkest days of the sport in terms of corruption by the cheats and liars. I cannot change the era or time that I am born into. I am very proud that I have met the temptations head on and have not wavered in my honesty or sold my ideals. I have always ridden true to myself and placed my morals beyond a need to win. I have ridden clean throughout my career. In a sport so tainted, this has generated many negative consequences. From the single example above; my team-mate and myself not getting paid for the rest of the year, after the Tour de France, being simple evidence. I am so very fortunate to have been able to have won clean.

Perhaps a major factor is that the races are short – only 3 hours long! This is perhaps a hard and unpopular fact that the male side may need to embrace if it is genuine about wanting to clean itself up.

I have been robbed by drug cheats, but I am fortunate, I am here before you with more in my basket than the 12 year old dreamed of. But for many genuine people out there who do ride clean; people with morals, many of these people have had to leave the sport with nothing after a lifetime of hard work — some going through horrific financial turmoil. When Lance "cries" on Oprah later this week and she passes him a tissue, spare a thought for all of those genuine people who walked away with no reward – just shattered dreams. Each one of them is worth a thousand Lances.

adam wrote:http://www.cyclingnews.com/features/ind ... -the-years

plenty of references here to "allegations" of positive tests being manipulated or swept under the carpet...

it is not so much about the proof of testing positive but about the manipulation of the system, avoidance and cover-up...

Stitch This wrote:Merging spammers with legit posts. Good grief!

God is an Englishman wrote:You're the one telling the story here - so where are the references?

adam wrote:Nicole Cooke :
...

Blueblood wrote:

Stitch This wrote:Merging spammers with legit posts. Good grief!

Besides the signature, I don't see anything in the post trying to sell us kitchens or handbags, and decided to give the poster the benefit of the doubt for their first post.
You will notice that this sub-forum stays a lot cleaner than others. Spammers or bots are usually deleted and most reports are usually closed quite quickly. I decided merging was the best option as there is already this well established thread regarding Armstrong and his doping.
If only other sub-forums were monitored the same way. Feel free to report tho Stitch.

Chade wrote:

God is an Englishman wrote:You're the one telling the story here - so where are the references?

Lrn2serch.

adam wrote:Nicole Cooke :
...

Yeah, saw that. Good on her. I'm definitely avoiding contributing to these guys' pockets (even though in Landis' case he's close to bankrupt from memory...).

God is an Englishman wrote:

adam wrote:http://www.cyclingnews.com/features/ind ... -the-years

plenty of references here to "allegations" of positive tests being manipulated or swept under the carpet...

it is not so much about the proof of testing positive but about the manipulation of the system, avoidance and cover-up...

You said it all with one word, ALLEGATIONS!!

adam wrote:

God is an Englishman wrote:

adam wrote:http://www.cyclingnews.com/features/ind ... -the-years

plenty of references here to "allegations" of positive tests being manipulated or swept under the carpet...

it is not so much about the proof of testing positive but about the manipulation of the system, avoidance and cover-up...

You said it all with one word, ALLEGATIONS!!

correct... but they are hardly allegations any longer hence the "...." - probably should have written that in blue text.

what we do now know is that he is a confessed drug cheat who manipulated the system to return negative tests and to avoid being caught...

bubu wrote: do we????
I dont think u were present to the Oprah interview...until friday - its all hearsay!

Chade wrote:

bubu wrote: do we????
I dont think u were present to the Oprah interview...until friday - its all hearsay!

Are you still saying that he's innocent because you haven't bothered to read the multitude of links providing details of witnesses and his failed tests?

Lance Armstrong finally has confronted his alleged use of performance-enhancing drugs during his cycling career, though he "did not come clean in the manner that I expected," talk show host Oprah Winfrey said a day after interviewing the disgraced athlete.

UPDATE: LANCE Armstrong reportedly offered to give the US government $5 million in compensation for alleged fraud.

The day after the former Tour de France champion "came clean" to Oprah Winfrey in aTV interview about doping allegations, CBS News is reporting he also offered to be a "co-operating witness".

The US Department of Justice reportedly turned down both offers as inadequate.

adam wrote:

UPDATE: LANCE Armstrong reportedly offered to give the US government $5 million in compensation for alleged fraud.

The day after the former Tour de France champion "came clean" to Oprah Winfrey in aTV interview about doping allegations, CBS News is reporting he also offered to be a "co-operating witness".

The US Department of Justice reportedly turned down both offers as inadequate.

Chade wrote:

bubu wrote: do we????
I dont think u were present to the Oprah interview...until friday - its all hearsay!

Are you still saying that he's innocent because you haven't bothered to read the multitude of links providing details of witnesses and his failed tests?

adam wrote:

UPDATE: LANCE Armstrong reportedly offered to give the US government $5 million in compensation for alleged fraud.

The day after the former Tour de France champion "came clean" to Oprah Winfrey in aTV interview about doping allegations, CBS News is reporting he also offered to be a "co-operating witness".

The US Department of Justice reportedly turned down both offers as inadequate.

Rose: Now that you know, what does it change for you?
Jenkins: Well, I think I knew the moment I read George Hincapie’s affidavit — which I accept as completely truthful — and some of the other rider affidavits. I don’t think you could have read the rider affidavits in the USADA report and not come to the conclusion that yeah, he did it. So the confession is important because it’s Lance finally telling people like me. I’ve been hearing all this stuff from other people, and I’ve expressed to him that what has disappointed me most is to hear it from others and not from him. So I belong in the category of friend and associate, and I think that he’s been doing a lot of apologizing to people like that in the last couple days. For better or worse, this is his moment to sort of let people hear it from him, rather than read it in a report or hear it in a broadcast.
Rose: Did he apologize to you?
Jenkins: He did. He did.
Rose: And what did he say?

Jenkins: He said he was sorry for misleading me. He said he was sorry — and this is a very small thing — but he expressed that he was sorry that my reputation had taken a hit because of my association with him, which I appreciated. And it wasn’t a very long conversation, but it was a meaningful one to me. I had hoped he was clean. He’s not. Am I angry about that? You know, I don’t rise to the level of anger that I think a lot of people want me to. I think that there’s a level of anger at Lance that is out of proportion to the offense of doping.

Rose: But there’s also this aspect of intimidation and threats…that is to many people believable.
Jenkins: Right. I think that that’s what he’s going to have to address with Oprah. I think it’s certainly equal to the doping, to be honest. Quite honestly, I thought that was the most damaging stuff in the USADA report. I think those are the toughest questions for him. You know, the Lance Armstrong that I know and that I have dealt with has never been threatening. He’s certainly complicated. He’s certainly flawed. He is certainly angry, at times, and combative. He’s never been menacing. Now, that’s my personal experience with him, and I’m a friend. I would not want to meet him as an adversary, I can say that. I think that he’s got some work to do to persuade people that that Lance Armstrong – the threatening, the intimidating Lance Armstrong that’s been portrayed – he’s got some work to do to convince people that that’s a mis-portrayal.

THE IOC has stripped Lance Armstrong of the bronze medal he won at the 2000 Sydney Olympics because of his involvement in doping.

Two officials say the IOC sent a letter to Armstrong on Wednesday night asking him to return the medal.

The move came after the IOC was notified by cycling's governing body that Armstrong had not appealed the decision to disqualify him.

The officials spoke to the AP on condition of anonymity because the decision hasn't been announced.

The IOC executive board discussed revoking the medal last month, but delayed a decision until cycling body UCI formally notified Armstrong he had been stripped of his seven Tour de France titles and all results since 1998.

He then had 21 days to appeal.

Now that the deadline has expired, the IOC has decided to take the medal away.