its probably just as easy here, they hand out hydrocodone like skittles.

yep getting old..
Consider this....

THE guys who are telling and complaining if all of this is true they doped and still lost to lance so either lance had better dope or all these complainers and whistle blowers
weren't good enough to beat lance while doped.
If some make the case everyone or anyone whos on top cheated by dopeing it still doesn't take away the fact that lance beat them. Now if he wansn't doping and beat them
well that would mean they sucked even worse.

If you look at known drug cheats, what % of tests did they fail?

Valverde was tested hundreds of time and failed ZERO

Landis was tested almost 100 times and failed ONE

Riis was tested hundreds of times and failed ZERO


etc...

---

ECMGN Therapy Silicon Valley:
Depression, Neurocognitive problems, Dementias (Testing and Evaluation), Trauma and PTSD, Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI)

Perhaps my reading comprehension skills are not as well developed as I thought. Perhaps I am rusty. From your posts I have been under the impression that you felt that there was not quality evidence of doping and asked to be supplied with such evidence. Please correct me if I am wrong.

In response, I made a list of people who have offered eyewitness accounts of doping and doping related activities. Please tell me which relevant court in the US does not allow eyewitness accounts. If you have no reasonable answer to my request about eyewitness accounts then you are plain and simple, wrong.

Then I listed physical evidence related to doping. Now this may not have led to a UCI infraction, but that does not mean it is not admissible in US courts as evidence (or that people can't use it to come to their own conclusions). Again, please tell me which US courts would not admit used syringes, urine samples etc. as evidence. The UCI's standards of evidence for convicting cyclists of doping is much higher than the US court system. Again, if you cannot answer the request about which relevant court does not allow this sort of evidence, then you are wrong.

In my previous post I made no reference to donations, race tactics etc. Others did, I did not.

As per the question "why hasn't Armstrong been busted down legally in court or by the appropriate sport agencies?" We can only speculate. It could be Omerta, a payoff, lack of will, anything; I don't know. How could I possibly answer that question? But this question is more than a simple question. It really is a statement claiming that past evidence is not actually evidence because it has not been used in a prior conviction. This is terrible logic. Frankly it seems like a passive aggressive way of defending against doping by using twisted logic to invalidate evidence. But maybe I'm just rusty.

Good to know. I had forgotten that Joe Papp was using Chinese made drugs.

In Mexico?
Never.

I was quoting you directly (maybe you should reread the thread :-)).

The point of my post was to rebut the position you seem to be wedded to (and which another poster just above me has tried to disabuse you of), that US courts have some "super standard" of evidence of admissability that will preclude most or indeed any of the many pieces of evidence identified in this thread. You seem to assume that because this evidence, which has dribbled out over years and in some cases has only come out BECAUSE of the current investigation, has generally (but not exclusively) not been introduced to a legal proceeding previously that means there must be something about it which makes it fundamentally inadmissable. That's just wrong.

There are technical rules of admissability (hearsay, illegality, privilege) for sure but the bar is generally pretty low. How much weight a judge or jury will give to any particular piece of evidence is an interesting BUT ENTIRELY SEPARATE issue.

Now while it's true that a good prosecutor won't ask a question he doesn't know the answer to you're also wrong to assume that he couldn't (as opposed to wouldn't) ask for example why LA chased down Simeoni (and why one of his teammates spat on him). He absolutely could ask that, LA's testimony would be evidence and a judge or jury depending on the context would be entitled to consider it.

---

"Are you sure we're going fast enough?" - Emil Zatopek

HAMslice's last Facebook entry: "BRB, someone's at the door..."

This just in. Doping at the Tour and cycling in general is not a new issue.

http://en.wikipedia.org/...t_the_Tour_de_France







____________________________________________________

---

Formerly DrD

I am not sure I am an LA apologist but I don't care if LA comes out tomorrow and says I pumped EPO into my body like gatorade for 20 years. I just don't think my opinion of him as an entertainer and athlete will change. I would still want to see him in Kona and will follow him on twitter and will probably still donate to Livestrong. That's not naive, I just don't feel as though he personally harmed me nor matter what he did. In fact quite the opposite. How many more titles can be wiped out before the TDF becomes a joke? All but a handful of winners either confessed to doping or tested positive for something over their careers since the mid 1950s. This was a fact of cycling I just accepted immediately, if you can't you should find another sport.....oh wait.

Those clinging to some moral high ground are simply naive. Those demanding Lance face "justice" are simply vindictive, regardless of the truth. Then there are the rest of us (likely the silent majority) that simply live in reality.

I don't hate LA because he doped (have to hate most of the peloton from '94 on in that case); I hate him because he actively worked to keep cycling from cleaning up and vengefully attacked those that fought against doping.

---

ECMGN Therapy Silicon Valley:
Depression, Neurocognitive problems, Dementias (Testing and Evaluation), Trauma and PTSD, Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI)

Interesting and disturbing to hear this. I want to have nothing to do with deceitful people and I do not find them entertaining.

---

________________
Adrian in Vancouver

The Simeoni thing is possibly the most damning in my opinion. It not only adds to the case against LA for doping, but also points strongly to the idea that he was a central figure in the doping culture, and just a vicious, spiteful person overall.

well said

But maybe that's the price of being Julia Mancuso when Lindsey Vonn is still around.
___________________________ Damn I must be old (50's), I have no idea who they are. Everybody bothers George because He is such a great guy, extremely well respected as an athlete and family man and business man. He speaks people listen. Andy Pettite to Roger Clemons

In a fairytale world that might be true. I suspect however you have unknowlingly supported other doped up athletes. You probably have enjoyed movies made by, or starring, cocaine addicts. You may have invested in companies that have engaged in illegal and/or unethical business practices. You are friends with someone that cheated on a test in school.

Suggest you build a cave and live in it....but sleep with one eye open cuz there are bears that will steal your food!

Don't care if they all used or if non did . It was a sign of the times.

---

2011 Cannondale Caad10
2008 Cannondale 29er 2
2011 Felt Da

See this is the part that should really worry people who are Armstrong fans (myself included). Hincapie isnt saying a word about this. My guess is, he didnt want to say what he had to say in front of the grand jury, but he wasnt going to go to jail for lance, and now hes going to bite his tongue until theres some announcement that he can hide behind.

---

-------------------------------------
You don't have to like what I say but you should respect my right to say them and I'll do the same to you.

As I posted before, he is the Andy Pettite to Roger Clemens. Also, the order of testimony. If they already had Hamilton, Landis, Frankie and lets say Popo or Heras then went to George, lot different than if they went to George first. If George collaborates, I think he has enough good will to survive. I hope so, I like big George. I personnaly like the hard working loyal die for you teamate better than the winners. I think thats why Jens has the big following.

How could this not convince the Lance believers of his guilt??? This was the person I was waiting to spill the juice (no pun intended) on Lance.

It is hard for me to believe too. Not too long ago Tyler was the hero and the same people defending Lance were outraged at the thought that Tyler would be guilty. He loved dogs, how could he cheat? Now he is scum and not credible becuase he points the finger at Lance. It reminds me of what happened to Lemond for doing the same.

There is nothing that will ever convince some of these people that Lance cheated. If Lance finally manned up to it they will say he was coerced and wanted to protect his finances from an extended court battle.

I give up on them, they are simply part of the hero worship mentality of putting athletes on pedastals.

Lance is arguably the most tested individual on the planet. Do you really think he fooled multiple daily drug tests for SEVEN yellow jerseys?

That certainly is impressive.

Ben Johnson fooled multiple testing for 7 years (1981 - 1988) before he was caught but he sure didn't win 7 yellow jerseys in that period.

I refuse to reply to this thread..

For me, Lance threads are like watching a train wreck, you can't turn away.

It is mind boggling to see the same people defend Lance for so many years despite the "mounting evidence" (put in italics to avoid someone asking me to provide a good legal definition to create another smokescreen).

For the record, I haven't stated my take on LA one way or the other.

You know things are getting bad for Lance when some of his most ardent defenders start hedging their bets.

Not sure if this was reported in thie thread but Hincapie has joined the fray now:
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/...ncapie.ap/index.html#

Report: Hincapie tells feds he saw Armstrong use banned substances
Story Highlights
Teammate George Hincapie says he saw Lance Armstrong use banned substancesHincapie told authorities he saw Armstrong use performance-enhancing drugsArmstrong described Hincapie as 'like a brother to me' in an interview last year
PRINT EMAIL FACEBOOK DIGG

RSS SHARE



George Hincapie told authorities he saw teammate and friend Lance Armstrong use PEDs.
Friedemann Vogel/Getty Images

NEW YORK (AP) -- A report by "60 Minutes" says George Hincapie, a longtime member of Lance Armstrong's inner circle, has told federal authorities he saw the seven-time Tour de France winner use performance-enhancing drugs.


Read more: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/...x.html#ixzz1Mw7awalz

---

Tom Demerly
The Tri Shop.com

Hincapie tells feds he saw Armstrong use banned substances

It won't be long before we start reading posts about how they "used to have" respect for Hincapie and now he is just another jealous rider trying to sell a book or gain fame.

Waiting for it.....