its this kind of thing that I find irksome.....why does a quote like this need to come from USADA?

clearly hyperbole no? Why not just facts why the rhetoric?


"The evidence shows beyond any doubt that the U.S. 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.

Equally amazing how many innocent people have been placed on death row/executed when they were actually innocent.

"I haven't seen the report"--Tim Herman.

Where is this file?

---

"I really wish you would post more often. You always have some good stuff to say. I copied it below just in case someone missed it." BarryP to Chainpin on 10/21/06

A live blog on the story for anyone that's interested...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/...ong-doping-case-live

This guy doesn't think its hyprbole:

---

"I really wish you would post more often. You always have some good stuff to say. I copied it below just in case someone missed it." BarryP to Chainpin on 10/21/06

Tim Herman on ESPN now in an interview. He said he still hasn't seen it and it was provided to reporters before Lance and his attorneys.

As one who followed the Ben Johnson scandal and various cycling doping scandals very closely, I have believed Lance doped since he started winning Tours. That said, I find it very difficult to understand how people get offended by his doping, but do not get similarily incensed by the doping of, among others, the 11 witnesses.

Lance stands firm with his implausible denials in the same way GH and JV and even a small fish like Michael Barry stand firm with their sob stories about having no choices, everyone was doing it, etc. To me, they are no different in that regard, yet the USADA calls them courageous and the media has been painting them as heros, or victims. To me they are liars and hypocrits (to be clear, not lying about LA, in the past they lied extensively about their own doping).

To some degree I respect LA for not taking a deal and not claiming he had no choice.

I get the argument that since LA was a ring leader, he should be vilified more than others, but this is a bit weak to me. Doping has been part of the Tour forever, just because LA did it really well doesn't change the culpability of everyone else who doped as well.

Letting someone like GH finish his season and giving retroactive 6 months bans to some, while enforcing a lifetime ban on LA does not seem like it is about cleaning up the sport, it seems like it is punishing those that will not do what the USADA wants. In many ways these weak sentences make doping less risky because as long as you are not a ring leader, you may choose to dope on the premise that if caught, you can just rat out a bigger fish and then walk away with effectively no sanction.

Looks more parabolic. y = -(x^2)

Not sure if this has been linked yet, but here is the leaked 'reasoned decision'...

http://www.scribd.com/...79/Reasoned-Decision

so, indirectly the answer is yes. USADA used the Fed's to "entice" testimony from the witness's.

One lingering question remains in this entire sordid affair:

WHAT THE FUCK HAPPENED TO TYLER HAMILTON'S HAIR?

---

"I really wish you would post more often. You always have some good stuff to say. I copied it below just in case someone missed it." BarryP to Chainpin on 10/21/06

But he knows it's "a one-sided hatchet job -- a taxpayer funded tabloid piece rehashing old, disproved, unreliable allegations based largely on axe-grinders, serial perjurers, coerced testimony, sweetheart deals and threat-induced stories.", regardless.

This is the Hincapie part of the RD (via Guardian):

Hincapie has testified that he was aware of Armstrong’s use of EPO and blood transfusions.
He reports that Armstrong even provided EPO to Hincapie for Hincapie’s own use.
Hincapie explains how he, like Armstrong, was a client of the doping doctor Michele Ferrari who incorporated EPO and blood doping into Hincapie’s training program.
And, Hincapie admits that he participated in the USPS/Discovery Channel blood doping program. A close friend of Armstrong and a key member of his team, Hincapie was in a position to know a great deal about what Armstrong was doing throughout the period from 1994 through 2005. As Armstrong wrote: “There have been times when I’ve practically lived out of the same suitcase with George Hincapie. In cycling we’re on the side of a mountain for weeks, in small hotel rooms, sharing every ache, and pain, and meal. You get to know everything about each other, including things you’d rather not.”
As indicated in his affidavit, Hincapie remains loyal to Armstrong. While Hincapie felt compelled to tell the truth to USADA, it was clear in discussion with him that he had no axe to grind and still thought highly of Armstrong’s abilities as a cyclist and ability to overcome adversity.
However, what Hincapie also knew about Armstrong and what he has testified to inintimate detail is Armstrong’s immersion in the doping culture on the USPS/Discovery Channel teams. Hincapie had no doubt that Armstrong doped and therefore no one else should either


"Hincapie has also provided first hand eyewitness testimony that Armstrong possessed EPO in 2005 and that in 2005 Armstrong administered EPO to Hincapie, in violation of sport anti-doping rules. Hincapie testified that, "Shortly before the 2005 Tour de France I was in need of EPO and I asked Lance Armstrong if he could provide some EPO for me. Lance said that he could, and he gave me two vials of EPO while we were both in Nice, France.

N.B. don't know why some of this has a line through it (a Slowtwitch formatting thing).

Tim Herman said, it's a rigged system and the athletes never win. He even had an analogy that the Christians dealing with the lions in Rome have a better chance than an athlete against USADA, funny.

No denying that he doped but the due process is flawed.

and this would be how NOT to do it . . .

http://online.wsj.com/...rticleTabs%3Darticle

"I regret that this was the state of affairs in the sport that we love and I chose as my career. I am sorry that I was forced to make the decisions I made. I admit that I didn't let doping deter me from my dream. I admit that I used banned substances."

these quotes sound tinny compared to George. and that is why George will get out of this and still be "Big George".





anyone else surprised that Jackmott isn't back? it seems like he would enjoy this.

That's Tyler Hamilton? I thought it was Jeff Spiccoli from "Fast Times at Ridgemont High."

---

Team Endurance Nation

So lets see the USADA are ok with riders that apparently confess to doping, letting them ride on, continue to race, continue to hold team places while riders that are clean are forced to watch them perform.......Shame on USADA, you cannot ever let someone compete against other athletes when you know they are dirty.....is that not the one sole job they have, to protect clean athletes from athletes that dope.

And I don't want to hear about this is the way the U.S. justice system works, protecting witnesses, these were dirty riders, they had no place competing anywhere in the world when the USADA knew they were dirty, not US justice, but world justice demands that....Shameful....Makes me wonder what other deals the USADA might have done.....Any athletes that respresented the US anywhere in the world, in a sport governed by the USADA can now be doubted, thanks to this action...Shameful, but true, how can we know that anyone on the 2012 US Olympic team was really clean, they might have done a "deal"....Hopefully WADA will demand that all known dirty athletes be named, or not allow any US athletes to compete anywhere.

Notice I didn't mention him ?.......don't need too, he was banned as soon as they had evidence, so should all the others.....back dated suspensions is pure BS

---

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

Sort of my point, though not for the same reason as you perhaps.

This case is overwhelming, against a rich, white guy who chose to not even try attacking it head on, because he was so guilty.

Any suggestion of aligned fates between LA and the sort of person who, though innocent, gets executed, says more about the person trying to make the comparison than anything else. Dangerously ignorant.

here's my theory:

Lance will get on a soap-box with a ton of documentation of all his doping AND evidence linking the bigwigs at the UCI that helped him cover-up, hide, bury etc.
He will say he did it because they(UCI) helped/forced him, and all the money he made got split into kick-backs to the UCI anything left over for him went into Livestrong(aside from the place in Girona.)
In the end he will still be loved by his fans, even after they take away his trophies.

---

---

"...I try not to ever ride as slow as 20mph. ;) ... And even more than that, I don't race with a speedometer. My computer is set up to show Power // Cadence // Time. I don't actually ever know how fast I'm going. I only know that if I'm in 53/11, and it takes more than 100rpm to hit my target watts, it's time to coast." - Jordan Rapp on '09 IMC

What's a snitch/informant?....not much difference here is there. Both riders and informants are 'dirty' but get reduced sentences (if any) for providing info to take down the big guns.

I don't like LA at all, but would love it if he did this....UCI deserves to be taken down in this whole mess.

We'll just have to disagree. The closest friend I've ever had died a few months ago from cancer. I was with him every step of the way. Another good friend is also in the later stages of the disease. I'm currently spending a lot of time with him. I'm offended that Lance continues to take people like them and blatantly lie to them. It's not too late for him to do something good. He could explain what he did and why he did it. He could work to improve the sport. But he won't do that.

To me it's more like worshiping your catholic priest, finding out there is overwhelming evidence of him being a child-molestor, and then having to defend him as he denies it over and over. And, no, I'm not trying to equate doping/lying/cheating/bullying/etc. with abusing children.

To be clear, I don't hate people, but I hate cancer. I empathize with anyone who is touched by it. It disgusts me how LA has used his cancer involvement as a shield. I understand that you feel differently, at least re LA, though.

So if USADA used obstruction as the reason for why the 8 year SOL was revoked, shouldn't the same case hold for these guys since they knew doping took place, were involved in doping, and hid doping from the anti-doping agencies? Sounds like double standards.