Lance again

[Michael[_10_]]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/lance-armstrong-faces-fresh-doping-charges-from-usada/2012/06/13/gJQAefnPaV_story.html

[DirtRoadie]

On Jun 13, 2:56*pm, Michael > wrote:
> http://www.washingtonpost.com/lance-armstrong-faces-fresh-doping-char...

The details:
http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/armstrongcharging0613.pdf

DR

[atriage[_6_]]

On 14/06/2012 01:25, DirtRoadie wrote:
> On Jun 13, 2:56 pm, > wrote:
>> http://www.washingtonpost.com/lance-armstrong-faces-fresh-doping-char...
>
> The details:
> http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/armstrongcharging0613.pdf
>

Now that is what you call a *comprehensive* rap sheet.

--

[Mark]

On Thursday, 14 June 2012 02:42:56 UTC-4, atriage wrote:
> On 14/06/2012 01:25, DirtRoadie wrote:
> > On Jun 13, 2:56 pm, > wrote:
> >> http://www.washingtonpost.com/lance-armstrong-faces-fresh-doping-char...
> >
> > The details:
> > http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/armstrongcharging0613.pdf
> >
>
> Now that is what you call a *comprehensive* rap sheet.
>
> --

Thanks. That's a good, old-fashioned conspiracy.

How easy is it to intimidate people in the cycling world? Do they really have so few career options outside the cycling industry that it was realistic to expect them to keep their mouths shut forever?

The long-term strategy of this conspiracy doesn't make sense unless the conspirators just wanted to buy enough time to loot the system.

[Fred Flintstein]

On 6/14/2012 9:39 AM, Mark wrote:
> On Thursday, 14 June 2012 02:42:56 UTC-4, atriage wrote:
>> On 14/06/2012 01:25, DirtRoadie wrote:
>>> On Jun 13, 2:56 pm, > wrote:
>>>> http://www.washingtonpost.com/lance-armstrong-faces-fresh-doping-char...
>>>
>>> The details:
>>> http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/armstrongcharging0613.pdf
>>>
>>
>> Now that is what you call a *comprehensive* rap sheet.
>>
>> --
>
> Thanks. That's a good, old-fashioned conspiracy.
>
> How easy is it to intimidate people in the cycling world? Do they really have so few career options outside the cycling industry that it was realistic to expect them to keep their mouths shut forever?
>
> The long-term strategy of this conspiracy doesn't make sense unless the conspirators just wanted to buy enough time to loot the system.

It seems heavy on he said/she said. The re-analyzed 1999 EPO positives
are missing. They do list the 2001 Swiss EPO positive that the guy
responsible is on record as saying is not a positive.

They are claiming evidence of 2009-10 blood transfusions, which wouldn't
threaten any of his Tour victories.

Looks to be quite a 3 ring circus.

F

[DirtRoadie]

On Jun 14, 10:21*am, Fred Flintstein
> wrote:
> On 6/14/2012 9:39 AM, Mark wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Thursday, 14 June 2012 02:42:56 UTC-4, atriage *wrote:
> >> On 14/06/2012 01:25, DirtRoadie wrote:
> >>> On Jun 13, 2:56 pm, > * wrote:
> >>>>http://www.washingtonpost.com/lance-armstrong-faces-fresh-doping-char....
>
> >>> The details:
> >>>http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/armstrongcharging061....
>
> >> Now that is what you call a *comprehensive* rap sheet.
>
> >> --
>
> > Thanks. That's a good, old-fashioned conspiracy.
>
> > How easy is it to intimidate people in the cycling world? *Do they really have so few career options outside the cycling industry that it was realistic to expect them to keep their mouths shut forever?
>
> > The long-term strategy of this conspiracy doesn't make sense unless the conspirators just wanted to buy enough time to loot the system.
>
> It seems heavy on he said/she said. The re-analyzed 1999 EPO positives
> are missing. They do list the 2001 Swiss EPO positive that the guy
> responsible is on record as saying is not a positive.
>
> They are claiming evidence of 2009-10 blood transfusions, which wouldn't
> threaten any of his Tour victories.
>
> Looks to be quite a 3 ring circus.
>

And whatever may have occurred previously, it's somewhat hard to
imagine that he was still "enhanced" in 2009/2010. I thought that
comeback was partially for the purpose of being able to lay to rest
earlier doping allegations by competing clean (and performing
credibly), taking advantage of the ostensibly cleaner peloton at that
time. It's a theory.

In contrast to other cases where the science of analytical findings is
challenged, I'm not quite sure how he addresses eyewitness testimony.
It probably won't be sufficient to merely say they are lying. And the
ploy of "But, I've done great things as an anti-cancer crusader,"
even to the extent it may be true, is not relevant.

DR

[steve]

> > Looks to be quite a 3 ring circus.

>
> In contrast to other cases where the science of analytical findings is
> challenged, I'm not quite sure how he addresses eyewitness testimony.
> It probably won't be sufficient to merely say they are lying.

Floyd

Tyler

If Armstrong forfeits any Tour wins who get the win Ulrich & Pantani.

There is enough evidence to make anybody suspicious but give me a
break how long has this gone on & at what cost?
Surely there are better uses of peoples time any money.

[atriage[_6_]]

On 14/06/2012 21:37, steve wrote:
>
>>> Looks to be quite a 3 ring circus.
>
>>
>> In contrast to other cases where the science of analytical findings is
>> challenged, I'm not quite sure how he addresses eyewitness testimony.
>> It probably won't be sufficient to merely say they are lying.
>
> Floyd
>
> Tyler
>
> If Armstrong forfeits any Tour wins who get the win Ulrich& Pantani.
>

Yeah they're gonna dig him up and nail a yellow shirt on him.


--

[Mineral Water]

On Wednesday, June 13, 2012 4:56:25 PM UTC-4, Michael wrote:
> http://www.washingtonpost.com/lance-armstrong-faces-fresh-doping-charges-from-usada/2012/06/13/gJQAefnPaV_story.html

Which of the other respondents will be the first to turn on Armstrong?

[Randall]

.On Jun 13, 2:56*pm, Michael > wrote:
> http://www.washingtonpost.com/lance-armstrong-faces-fresh-doping-char...

Most of the charges are flimsy. The USDA accusation of blood
manipulation is the one that Lance has to be concerned about, They
also claimed that the tax doctors were found with . needles and other
thing such as measuring devices were found. It is not against UCI
regulations to possess these. They are doctors after all. There's
new rules that regulate injections. This is a good thing.

[Ronko]

In article >,
says...
>
>
>On 14/06/2012 21:37, steve wrote:
>>
>>>> Looks to be quite a 3 ring circus.
>>
>>>
>>> In contrast to other cases where the science of analytical findings is
>>> challenged, I'm not quite sure how he addresses eyewitness testimony.
>>> It probably won't be sufficient to merely say they are lying.
>>
>> Floyd
>>
>> Tyler
>>
>> If Armstrong forfeits any Tour wins who get the win Ulrich& Pantani.
>>
>
>Yeah they're gonna dig him up and nail a yellow shirt on him.
>
Follow the money. Tyler Hamilton played a key part in breaking this open by
his 60 Minutes interview done concurrently with the release of his book.
Hamilton admits to doping. Follow the money for Tyler, come clean, finger
Lance, sell more books, get remarried.

[Frederick the Great]

In article
>,
Randall > wrote:

> .On Jun 13, 2:56Â*pm, Michael > wrote:
> > http://www.washingtonpost.com/lance-armstrong-faces-fresh-doping-char...
>
> Most of the charges are flimsy. The USDA accusation of blood
> manipulation is the one that Lance has to be concerned about, They
> also claimed that the tax doctors were found with . needles and other
> thing such as measuring devices were found. It is not against UCI
> regulations to possess these. They are doctors after all. There's
> new rules that regulate injections. This is a good thing.

More regulations are not a good thing.
First across the line wins. That is all.

--
Old Fritz