No, you are just the one doing everything you can to avoid the meat of my post, including going on the attack. I guess this response pretty much bears out what I said about you.

Enjoy your dancing, I'm done with you here.

I'm attacking you? You made a claim about me. I asked for a link to back up that claim. You have not provided a link. And that equals attacking you?

Uh, OK.

Again, there was oohing to respond to, since I never made a claim re: direct or indirect profiting from Livestrong. You need to take that argument up with those that did. I simply pointed about how he WAS profiting from Livestrong.

Now, any time you would like provide a link to back up your claims, that would be great.

---

Chicago Cubs - 2016 WORLD SERIES Champions!!!!

"If ever the time should come, when vain and aspiring men shall possess the highest seats in government, our country will stand in need of its experienced patriots to prevent its ruin." - Samuel Adams

No need. Really not interested. IMO, justice came through. Finally.

---

________________
Adrian in Vancouver

That response speaks volumes about your moral character.

Still waiting for that link, Ned.

Or maybe your just like making accusations about people without being able to provide proof.

C'mon....you made the claim. Please provide the proof. If I have done as you claim, it should be easy to do.

We'll wait.....

---

Chicago Cubs - 2016 WORLD SERIES Champions!!!!

"If ever the time should come, when vain and aspiring men shall possess the highest seats in government, our country will stand in need of its experienced patriots to prevent its ruin." - Samuel Adams

I just about choked on my muffin in laughter reading your comment. My moral character does not cheat. Your hero was too weak to enter arbitration because he knows a lot of dirt would have brought him down. Poor Lance. Unfortunate for him how he is not allowed to keep the trophies he won while cheating. Seems unfair doesn't it?

---

________________
Adrian in Vancouver

Let's break this down:

1) Make claim to make it seem like it is no big deal...yet continue to argue and attack.

2) Claim LA is my hero. Very typical. (P.S. If I had to pick a cycling "hero" it would be Lemond, Davis Phinney, Bauer and Hampsten since they the people that inspired me as a kid to start riding and racing.)

3) Continue to go on the offensive while avoiding the points and questions about the bullshit you spewed.

That is why this is just another post that makes our lack of moral character clear. I am tempted to tell you I am done with your sorry ass but I have to admit I am having fun watching you blindly flail away.

funny, he's done engaging me and just resorted to say i'm spewing bullshit once i posted a link from USADA and asked him to show me what i wrote is bullshit

If you purchase any merchandise with the logo live strong on it all money goes to charity after manufacturing costs. Get your facts straight.

Quote:

They should be focusing on what's happening in sports today not what happened 13 years ago when drug use was out of control.

You, and frankly most of us, are missing the big picture. If this was a simple as LA doping, fine slap him with a symbolic 2 yr ban and move on. LA is only one of the named defendants. Think about the future. Would you want your son racing for an under 23 developmental teal run by LA, Bruyneel, Ferrari, etc. It's about keeping the ring leaders out of the sport in the future.

What does this do for his 70.3 wins ? Does he keep them or does he lose them as well ?

He will lose his Olympic medal as well, but more importantly he should lose his Leadville 100 win and give it back to Dave Wiens

Ulimately its up to WTC. Just like the TDF wins is up to that organization. As of today he is still listed as the winner of all his TDF wins. The USADA can recomend that tjhey strip him, but they have no authority to take them away.

---

Styrrell

Don't want to start a new thread on this.

There appear to be plenty of experts following this, but can someone explain to me why USADA does not have to make the case with evidence in arbitration regardless of the fact that Armstrong will not challenge the allegations. In civil, criminal and administrative law, the fact that someone doesn't appear, or renounces jurisdiction or doesn't object to the allegations, typically doesn't relieve the government, or agency from having to still put on a case.

I'm not referring to USADA's drafting of a "reasoned opinion," which I read in one of the articles. Why aren't they required to put on a full case. I realize they will have to make a similar case against several others: e.g, Bruyneel?

Maybe this is unique to arbitration law.

The USADA said it will be releasing it's evidence as it will present it to the UCI

I do believe the USADA already made the case.

---

________________
Adrian in Vancouver

So...
I don't think USADA has the authority to "strip" him of his TDF victories.
Concur?
I'm just curious.
If I'm right, the TDF has to make that call?

I was wondering if he can race kona? If there is no active case then he could race. I want to see this dude Race

Yeah there is no active case because he is banned, anyone under WADA which includes WTC. Serious question, Why would you want to see a doper race aagainst clean guys?

Who is to say that people racing Ironman are clean. Seriously. How do we know. They have passed their tests just like the cyclists have. Hell there are people juicing for Gran Fondo's.

Because they have not been found guilty like Lance. There has not been evidence building for years like Lance. So I see your position, if Lance is dirty all are dirty.

I could be wrong sir but Lance hasn't been found guilty . He just chose not to contest - some are seeing that either rightly or wrongly as an admission of guilt .

A lot of people think lance is guilty just as a lot of people think there is a lot in our sport who aren't clean

Yeah you could be. Innocent people are not sanctioned and banned for life. He accepted the verdict.
Edit......By accepting the ban it may not be an admission of guilt like an alfred plea or no comtest, the rulling authority has found him guilty and he is not contesting, therefor he is guilty. No different than in a criminal case a defendent can plead "not guilty" be found guilty but he can still not admit guilt. Does not change the finding.

Does anyone really think this is over?
....The UCI does not recognise the USADA in this case, and will be going to WADA to have the UCI jurisdiction upheld.....The UCI filed their own objections in the the same case against USADA that Lance filed, this case was thrown out by the judge, who actually agreed with the UCI, and Lance that USADA was not a judical authority that could hold fair, honest, and reasonable hearings, but under U.S. law he could not stop the USADA.


To those Lance haters, congrats Jan Ullirch just won 3 more tours....yeah baby, you won, a convicted drug cheat, who actually failed mulptiple tests, did you get what you wanted ??

They all cheated....yep all of them, it was the way it was.....the chances there was ever a "clean" winner until this year ZERO......and maybe, just maybe this year

.....now if only the USADA would actually catch people, you know, test people and have labs actually produce results that can be used.

---

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>X
If you run long enough....something is bound to happen