USADA report "proves" Armstrong used drugs

I started reading the report and given how detailed the accounts were
I am starting to believe that Lance was probably guilty. It would
seem hard to fabricate such a big lie. It's possible however that the
witnesses were asked about specific instances and then coerced to lie.
It's hard to tell since the transcript were not available.

I haven't seen any interview transcripts, but the affidavits are posted at:

http://cyclinginvestigation.usada.org/

under the tab "Appendices and Supporting Materials".

"Red Cloud" wrote in message
...
On Oct 10, 1:23 pm, "Free Willy" wrote:
"atriage" wrote in message

eb.com...











The wrote:
http://news.yahoo.com/usada-report-p...d-drugs-153323...
NEW YORK (Reuters) - Lance Armstrong and his team ran the most
sophisticated
doping program in sport according to the United States Anti-Doping Agency
(USDA) which released its report on the case against the US Postal
cycling
team on Wednesday.
USADA said it was sending the report, which was more than 1,000 pages
long
and contained the sworn testimony of 26 people, including 15 riders, to
the
International Cycling Union (UCI), the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA)
and
the World Triathlon Corporation (WTC), before making it available on its
website.
"The evidence shows beyond any doubt that the US Postal Service Pro
Cycling
Team ran the most sophisticated, professionalized and successful doping
program that sport has ever seen," USADA said in a statement from chief
executive Travis Tygart.
"The evidence also includes direct documentary evidence

Let's see fatty McQuaid wriggle out of this one.

So far, all I see are opinions couched as facts.

The UCI will laugh at the USADA and well they should. The UCI oversees the
controls in the TDF and since Lance never failed to pass each and every
control. The USADA has no standing.

--
Willy Free

Why the hell Armstrong's former teammates admitted it? Why hell they
do that unless they knew Armstrong did dope and made a tons of the
money out of it as well as got fame and fortune. Landis admitted out
of the jealous? But 5 or 6 other
armstrong teammates also confessed using banned chemical. This can't
be untrue. ON top of that, I suspect that these guys did not care
about the moral or
ethical using banned chemical since they cared more about fame &
fortune.
Not going to jail for it anyway, so why not use dope! Hey I would do
the same!

Good Job Lance Armstrong!!!! He got caught but he won't go to jail for
it)))


============888888888============8888888888888==== ===========

Hey, dumbass, if you are drinking and driving and the limit is .08% and you
get pulled over by the cops and you blow .07% then you are under the limit and
not guilty of DUI.

By the same token, if WADA says the Hematocrit limit is 49% and Lance tests at
48% then he is under the limit and not guilty of doping. Only when over the
limit is any cyclist guilty of doping. The controls have limits for a purpose.
For some drugs the presence of any of it at all is a violation. For others,
since the body naturally produces them (testosterone, for example) there is a
limit. Hematocrit levels can be elevated by using EPO. But if EPO is not found
in the controls then a high Hematocrit cannot be said to be due to doping.
Some people have higher Hematocrit than others.

Lance never failed a WADA doping control - this means he was always under the
limit set by WADA. For USADA to run an investigation where people claimed
Lance doped and then say to the UCI -"Take away Lance's Tour wins because some
people say he's a doper," is ludicrous. The USADA has no standing when it
comes to WADA controls and UCI rules.

--
Willy Free

On 10/10/2012 5:47 PM, The Observer wrote:
http://news.yahoo.com/usada-report-p...3625--spt.html


NEW YORK (Reuters) - Lance Armstrong and his team ran the most
sophisticated
doping program in sport according to the United States Anti-Doping Agency
(USDA) which released its report on the case against the US Postal cycling
team on Wednesday.

USADA said it was sending the report, which was more than 1,000 pages long
and contained the sworn testimony of 26 people, including 15 riders, to the
International Cycling Union (UCI), the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) and
the World Triathlon Corporation (WTC), before making it available on its
website.

"The evidence shows beyond any doubt that the US Postal Service Pro Cycling
Team ran the most sophisticated, professionalized and successful doping
program that sport has ever seen," USADA said in a statement from chief
executive Travis Tygart.

"The evidence also includes direct documentary evidence including financial
payments, emails, scientific data and laboratory test results that further
prove the use, possession and distribution of performance enhancing
drugs by
Lance Armstrong and confirm the disappointing truth about the deceptive
activities of the USPS Team, a team that received tens of millions of
American taxpayer dollars in funding."

Armstrong has denied cheating and never failed a doping test but the
seven-times Tour de France winner was banned for life by USADA in August
after announcing he would not fight the charges.

Armstrong's lawyers have repeatedly attacked the credibility of USADA's
case, describing the proceedings as a "kangaroo court" and a "witch
hunt" on
the eve of Wednesday's release.

"USADA has continued its efforts to coerce and manufacture evidence from
other riders through threats and sweetheart deals and generated
self-serving
media coverage through leaks and piecemeal release of tired, disproven
allegations," Armstrong's attorney, Timothy J. Herman, wrote in a letter to
USADA.

"This reasoned decision will be a farce... while USADA can put lipstick
on a
pig, it still remains a pig."

USADA said the case against Armstrong and his team included eyewitness,
documentary, first-hand, scientific, direct and circumstantial evidence and
testimony from 11 former team mates.

Several former team mates have already spoken out publicly against
Armstrong
but USADA named all 11 for the first time on Wednesday.

"The evidence demonstrates that the ‘Code of Silence' of performance
enhancing drug use in the sport of cycling has been shattered, but there is
more to do," USADA said.

"From day one, we always hoped this investigation would bring to a close
this troubling chapter in cycling's history and we hope the sport will use
this tragedy to prevent it from ever happening again," it added.

USADA identified the 11 team mates as: Frankie Andreu, Michael Barry, Tom
Danielson, Tyler Hamilton, George Hincapie, Floyd Landis, Levi Leipheimer,
Stephen Swart, Christian Vande Velde, Jonathan Vaughters and David
Zabriskie.

"It took tremendous courage for the riders on the USPS Team and others to
come forward and speak truthfully. It is not easy to admit your mistakes
and
accept your punishment," USADA said.

"But that is what these riders have done for the good of the sport, and for
the young riders who hope to one day reach their dreams without using
dangerous drugs or methods."

The UCI had been heavily critical of the American anti-doping body for not
releasing its findings sooner.

The UCI can appeal the decision to ban Armstrong for life, even though the
American decided not to fight the case, but the sport's world governing
body
had not yet responded shortly after the USADA report was released.

(Additional reporting by Gene Cherry; Editing by Ken Ferris)

What I find extraordinary is the wording - from the outset it's not like
a legal enquiry, more an emotional appeal. An example :


"the disappointing truth about the deceptive activities of the USPS
Team, a team that received tens of millions of American taxpayer dollars
in funding."


Now it may be that in the USA that's acceptable in court. Here in the UK
it would be thrown out as mere opinion. Additionally in the appendices
there are absolutely NO transcripts, so it's impossible to gauge whether
leading questions were asked of any "witness".

Is the US justice system so very different to the UK's?

Taking, as ever, no sides, just sayin'.

--
Chris

'Fashion is a form of ugliness so intolerable that we have to alter it
every six months.'

(Oscar Wilde.)

On Friday, October 12, 2012 12:54:24 PM UTC-5, Free Willy wrote:
"Red Cloud" wrote in message

...

On Oct 10, 1:23 pm, "Free Willy" wrote:

"atriage" wrote in message



eb.com...























The wrote:

http://news.yahoo.com/usada-report-p...d-drugs-153323....

NEW YORK (Reuters) - Lance Armstrong and his team ran the most

sophisticated

doping program in sport according to the United States Anti-Doping Agency

(USDA) which released its report on the case against the US Postal

cycling

team on Wednesday.

USADA said it was sending the report, which was more than 1,000 pages

long

and contained the sworn testimony of 26 people, including 15 riders, to

the

International Cycling Union (UCI), the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA)

and

the World Triathlon Corporation (WTC), before making it available on its

website.

"The evidence shows beyond any doubt that the US Postal Service Pro

Cycling

Team ran the most sophisticated, professionalized and successful doping

program that sport has ever seen," USADA said in a statement from chief

executive Travis Tygart.

"The evidence also includes direct documentary evidence



Let's see fatty McQuaid wriggle out of this one.



So far, all I see are opinions couched as facts.



The UCI will laugh at the USADA and well they should. The UCI oversees the

controls in the TDF and since Lance never failed to pass each and every

control. The USADA has no standing.



--

Willy Free



Why the hell Armstrong's former teammates admitted it? Why hell they

do that unless they knew Armstrong did dope and made a tons of the

money out of it as well as got fame and fortune. Landis admitted out

of the jealous? But 5 or 6 other

armstrong teammates also confessed using banned chemical. This can't

be untrue. ON top of that, I suspect that these guys did not care

about the moral or

ethical using banned chemical since they cared more about fame &

fortune.

Not going to jail for it anyway, so why not use dope! Hey I would do

the same!



Good Job Lance Armstrong!!!! He got caught but he won't go to jail for

it)))





============888888888============8888888888888==== ===========



Hey, dumbass, if you are drinking and driving and the limit is .08% and you

get pulled over by the cops and you blow .07% then you are under the limit and

not guilty of DUI.



By the same token, if WADA says the Hematocrit limit is 49% and Lance tests at

48% then he is under the limit and not guilty of doping. Only when over the

limit is any cyclist guilty of doping. The controls have limits for a purpose.

For some drugs the presence of any of it at all is a violation. For others,

since the body naturally produces them (testosterone, for example) there is a

limit. Hematocrit levels can be elevated by using EPO. But if EPO is not found

in the controls then a high Hematocrit cannot be said to be due to doping..

Some people have higher Hematocrit than others.



Lance never failed a WADA doping control - this means he was always under the

limit set by WADA. For USADA to run an investigation where people claimed

Lance doped and then say to the UCI -"Take away Lance's Tour wins because some

people say he's a doper," is ludicrous. The USADA has no standing when it

comes to WADA controls and UCI rules.



--

Willy Free


Hey, dumbass, if you are drinking and driving and the limit is .08% and you

get pulled over by the cops and you blow .07% then you are under the limit and

not guilty of DUI.
Does that mean your NOT drunk?
Lance may have almost never failed a test, but that does not mean he never doped. He was under strict control of the team doctor, and team manager for his doping program so he would pass. And from what I have read, LA did fail a test or two, but was able to "buy" a negative result.
Just sayin'
Coz

"TheCoz" wrote ...
Free Willy wrote:

[trim]

Hey, dumbass, if you are drinking and driving and the limit is .08% and you
get pulled over by the cops and you blow .07% then you are under the limit
and not guilty of DUI.

Does that mean your NOT drunk?

Yes, it means precisely that as the definition of "drunk" driving is over the
limit of .08% . Under the limit means you're not considered drunk.

Lance may have almost never failed a test, but that does not mean
he never doped.

Yes it does. What defines doping is failing to pass the controls. The controls
are set up precisely to define doping. Any old Rube can come along and claim
Lance was doping. But, by whose definition? It has to be doping according to
the definition (controls) set up by the sanctioning body which is the UCI for
the Tour and which is WADA running the controls. As long as Lance didn't run
afoul of the WADA controls then, by definition, he's not doping as doping is
defined by the limits (controls) set forth by WADA over which limits it is
then called doping and punishable.

He was under strict control of the team doctor,
and team manager for his doping program so he would pass.

Duh! You continue to use your own definition of doping which seems to be
saying, "Throw the controls out as they mean nothing. Instead you call doping
using ANY amount of any substance covered in the controls. You are incorrect.
IOW, one must be proven guilty by failing the controls - not assumed guilty by
word of mouth.

FYI, some substances are prohibited at any detectable level and some
substances are prohibited above established levels.

http://www.uci.ch/Modules/BUILTIN/ge...QxNzI&LangId=1

Having an agency, other than the one that oversees the controls and the
testing, trying to tell the controlling agency to take away wins on the basis
of after-the-fact investigations based primarily upon hearsay is simply
ludicrous. It would be great if the UCI and WADA told the USADA to mind their
own business.

--
Willy Free

In article ,
Mower Man wrote:

Is the US justice system so very different to the UK's?

It is different in many ways. What you are looking at
is not the USA justice system; nor is it a reasonable
facsimile.

Take for example the right to cross-examine one's
accuser's. Not present in the USADA dog and pony show.

--
Old Fritz