Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

Prev Next
Re: Lance claims unfair treatment [pick6] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
USADA has laid out a nice proposal that I believe WADA will get behind.

___________

What is it,and where can this info be found?


ETA: I'm not even advocating giving Lance a reduced sentence unless he fully cooperates (basically giving all the info he knows/has on whoever). But assuming USADA continues to want to talk/meet with him, I'm assuming he has info that they likely want really badly enough to probaly bargain with each other. So, in that event, I'd have no problem if they reduced Lance's sentence for the info they want from him. That's been the basic premise of their investigation tactics and would get him what he wants in order to play ball with them.

------------------
@brooksdoughtie
USAT-L2,Y&J; USAC-L2
http://www.aomultisport.com
Last edited by: BDoughtie: Feb 4, 13 17:58
Quote Reply
Re: Lance claims unfair treatment [BDoughtie] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
BDoughtie wrote:
USADA has laid out a nice proposal that I believe WADA will get behind.

___________

What is it,and where can this info be found?


ETA: I'm not even advocating giving Lance a reduced sentence unless he fully cooperates (basically giving all the info he knows/has on whoever). But assuming USADA continues to want to talk/meet with him, I'm assuming he has info that they likely want really badly enough to probaly bargain with each other. So, in that event, I'd have no problem if they reduced Lance's sentence for the info they want from him. That's been the basic premise of their investigation tactics and would get him what he wants in order to play ball with them.


http://www.cyclingnews.com/features/inside-usadas-draft-for-a-truth-and-reconciliation-commission
Quote Reply
Re: Lance claims unfair treatment [pick6] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Thanks good read.

------------------
@brooksdoughtie
USAT-L2,Y&J; USAC-L2
http://www.aomultisport.com
Quote Reply
Re: Lance claims unfair treatment [Slowman] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I totally agree but I think there's something larger happening in terms of punishment and I think it is warranted.
Outside of the specifics of doping and the punishments it warrants -- Lance was always playing a bigger game. And he was winning the bigger game such that even though his Tour proceeds got divvied up his sponsorship proceeds and public adoration proceeds didn't. Hence the hundreds of millions and rock star status.
That's the game he is now losing and his punishment reflects that. Is that right? I actually do think so. On paper, no -- he doped, they doped -- the difference shouldn't be so extreme. But the extremity of reward created by Lance being Lance is the same extremity of fall he seems so shocked to be experiencing.
I will admit a certain amount of schadenfreude -- but what I'm more intrigued by is that a guy who always saw the bigger picture fails to see it now - - but that's because the the guy who always saw that big picture has to, in essence, die before the real picture can be seen - a paradox that seems to be confounding the flailing Lance - he refuses to surrender. He has to lose a lot more than he has lost to have any chance of seeing his real comeback - - and that comeback will be internal not on Oprah or in Ironman. I just don't see it happening. But the disparity in punishment is actually helpful that way.
Quote Reply
Re: Lance claims unfair treatment [bensophoto] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
"that's because the the guy who always saw that big picture has to, in essence, die before the real picture can be seen - a paradox that seems to be confounding the flailing Lance - he refuses to surrender."

yup. no disagreement there. except that i think lance sees it as you do as well, in a way. i think lance sees it as his responsibility to take the biggest fall, to make the biggest apology, to right the biggest wrongs. i don't see anybody else getting sued. i don't see anybody else getting asked for their money back. i don't see anybody else banned (in any consequential way). i don't see anybody else apologizing, really, in any substantial way. i don't think anybody else is being asked by anybody to, in any way, change. i think lance understands that he's going to take the heat for the entire world of cycling. i don't think he's happy about that, but i think he understands it. i don't think he's yet prepared for it. i think he knows he's not yet ready for it. i think he's taken initial steps, and i think he knows that he's going to need to undergo more fundamental change and growth before it's all over. i think he acknowledged that when he admitted that there's no new lance walking around now. it's still the old lance, making progress in fits and starts.


Dan Empfield
aka Slowman
Quote Reply
Re: Lance claims unfair treatment [bensophoto] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Do you guys really think this all starts with the riders? Lets forget about Lance for a minute. Do you think Joe Cyclist joins a pro team and decides he needs to up his game and starts looking for doping doctors and setting up a doping regiment? I think not. More likely it's the team, coaches and directors that introduce the riders to the program and impose it on them.

I'm not saying that the riders are completely innocent victims, but going after the riders, even one such as Lance, isn't the right way to do it and doesn't get to the heart of the problem. They are just replacable resources for the team.
Quote Reply
Re: Lance claims unfair treatment [Slowman] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
The reason why no one else other than Lance is getting sued is because no one else other than Lance sued and won money from newspapers, book writers, and insurance companies that were right in the first place. They are not suing Lance for Lance's money. They are suing Lance to get their money an reputations back.

I'm pretty sure if all the other riders that doped won money from newspapers and insurance companies they would probably see lawsuits on their hands to return that money + interests + legal fees.

EDIT to say: Lance admits that he doesn't remember or know everyone that he sued. How many other dopers can say that? If you are going to sue so many people that you can't even remember, you stand a better chance that some of those people are going to come and ask for their money back.

Slowman wrote:
"that's because the the guy who always saw that big picture has to, in essence, die before the real picture can be seen - a paradox that seems to be confounding the flailing Lance - he refuses to surrender."

yup. no disagreement there. except that i think lance sees it as you do as well, in a way. i think lance sees it as his responsibility to take the biggest fall, to make the biggest apology, to right the biggest wrongs. i don't see anybody else getting sued. i don't see anybody else getting asked for their money back. i don't see anybody else banned (in any consequential way). i don't see anybody else apologizing, really, in any substantial way. i don't think anybody else is being asked by anybody to, in any way, change. i think lance understands that he's going to take the heat for the entire world of cycling. i don't think he's happy about that, but i think he understands it. i don't think he's yet prepared for it. i think he knows he's not yet ready for it. i think he's taken initial steps, and i think he knows that he's going to need to undergo more fundamental change and growth before it's all over. i think he acknowledged that when he admitted that there's no new lance walking around now. it's still the old lance, making progress in fits and starts.


__________________________________________________________________________
My marathon PR is "under three, high twos. I had a two hour and fifty-something."
Last edited by: zoom: Feb 5, 13 8:37
Quote Reply
Re: Lance claims unfair treatment [packetloss] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
packetloss wrote:
Do you guys really think this all starts with the riders? Lets forget about Lance for a minute. Do you think Joe Cyclist joins a pro team and decides he needs to up his game and starts looking for doping doctors and setting up a doping regiment? I think not. More likely it's the team, coaches and directors that introduce the riders to the program and impose it on them.

I'm not saying that the riders are completely innocent victims, but going after the riders, even one such as Lance, isn't the right way to do it and doesn't get to the heart of the problem. They are just replacable resources for the team.

Exactly. Guys like Manaol Saiz and Johan Bruyneel, the doctors and even Omerta poster boy Jim Ochowicz need to be held accountable for allowing things to go on so long.
Quote Reply
Re: Lance claims unfair treatment [zoom] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
"The reason why no one else other than Lance is getting sued is because no one else other than Lance sued and won money from newspapers, book writers, and insurance companies that were right in the first place"

in that instance you're right. i'm more referring to the USPS issue, which i think is bogus, not because of anything to do with lance, rather that: 1) i don't see why the USPS deserves treatment that its competitors, Fedex and UPS, do not get; and 2) the USPS takes great pains in describing how it's really not govt funded, it's a stand-alone entity, it makes its own money, until it wants to claim that it is a govt entity. my point is that lance is going to give back money to USPS, but there will be no clawback to the other riders. yes, lance was a partner in tailwind, however, tailwind was never really a salable product. there was on exit strategy. all the riders get a pass, even tho all those riders knew that to whatever degree USPS was being defrauded by lance, it was being defrauded by them as well.

but i don't want to set off everybody's emotions again. lance did what he did, he's paying a heavy price, he should pay a heavy price. i would be upset if he did not pay a heavy price. i just think there's a zero sum psychology to this, where there's X amount of outrage that people have available to expend, and many have decided to expend it all on lance, leaving none left over for other culpable parties.



Dan Empfield
aka Slowman
Quote Reply
Re: Lance claims unfair treatment [Slowman] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Slowman wrote:
the riders get a pass, even tho all those riders knew that to whatever degree USPS was being defrauded by lance, it was being defrauded by them as well.

This is the part of the story I've never understood. Even before Nowitsky (sp?) dropped the federal case against Armstrong. Where exactly was the fraud that the USPS suffered?

I went and looked up a legal definition of fraud and found this (emphasis added by me):

Quote:
A false representation of a matter of fact—whether by words or by conduct, by false or misleading allegations, or by concealment of what should have been disclosed—that deceives and is intended to deceive another so that the individual will act upon it to her or his legal injury.

Fraud must be proved by showing that the defendant's actions involved five separate elements: (1) a false statement of a material fact,(2) knowledge on the part of the defendant that the statement is untrue, (3) intent on the part of the defendant to deceive the alleged victim, (4) justifiable reliance by the alleged victim on the statement, and (5) injury to the alleged victim as a result.

Admittedly, this is just me googling a legal term so maybe a real lawyer is going to say that's all wrong. But I have to believe that any charge of fraud requires some allegation of injury. So what is the injury that USPS or the US Government is supposed to have suffered as a result of the cycling team doping?

What did they pay the team for? Good publicity by association as a sponsor. And what did they get for their money? Exactly that: Good publicity by association as a sponsor. (One wonders why the USPS would need publicity of any kind but so be it).

So now, years, 9 years after their sponsorship ended and drug use is admitted, does anyone believe that the US Postal Service is somehow going to suffer injury of any kind? Is anyone out there not going to buy a stamp because Lance Armstrong doped? Ridiculous.

I don't see an injury aspect at all short of hurt feelings.
Quote Reply
Re: Lance claims unfair treatment [JoeO] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I could be mistaken but I think the main allegation was that federal tax dollars were used to fund an illegal doping operation (not sure what the legal term for that is unless that regarded as fraud)
Quote Reply
Re: Lance claims unfair treatment [Runguy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I don't think so. While I doubt the USPS would ever want to spend money to help cyclists dope, the fact is they were spending the money for publicity -- which they received.

If illegal doping is the crime that the government is concerned about, prosecute that. But the notion of "fraud" and the requisite injury still seems to be missing. I think you have to do some serious mental gymnastics to come up with scenario in which USPS was injured by any of this.

Now the competitors, and the people he sued left and right -- they certainly seem to have reason to claim injury. But the USPS? Hardly
Quote Reply
Re: Lance claims unfair treatment [JoeO] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
My understanding is that there were representations in the contracts that there was no doping on the team.
Quote Reply
Re: Lance claims unfair treatment [Trexlera] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Trexlera wrote:
My understanding is that there were representations in the contracts that there was no doping on the team.

That by itself would not instigate a federal investigation. That would be the allegation that federal dollars funded a drug opertaion
Quote Reply
Re: Lance claims unfair treatment [Runguy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Opened thread to see if usual pack of people still arguing over useless Lance crap were posting.

Thread did not disappoint.

_____________________________________________
Rick, "Retired" hobbyist athlete
Trying to come back slowly from acute A-Fib
Last edited by: Daremo: Feb 5, 13 11:18
Quote Reply
Re: Lance claims unfair treatment [Daremo] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Daremo wrote:
Opened thread to see if usual pack of people still arguing over useless Lance crap were posting.

Thread did not disappoint.

so you like looking at car crashes , too
Quote Reply
Re: Lance claims unfair treatment [Runguy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
https://i.chzbgr.com/maxW500/6990077696/h6817291B/





____________________________________________

"which is like watching one of your buddies announce that he's quitting booze and cigarettes, switching to a Vegan diet and training for triathalons ... but he's going to keep snorting heroin." Bill Simmons, ESPN
Quote Reply
Re: Lance claims unfair treatment [JoeO] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
JoeO wrote:
I don't think so. While I doubt the USPS would ever want to spend money to help cyclists dope, the fact is they were spending the money for publicity -- which they received.

If illegal doping is the crime that the government is concerned about, prosecute that. But the notion of "fraud" and the requisite injury still seems to be missing. I think you have to do some serious mental gymnastics to come up with scenario in which USPS was injured by any of this.

Now the competitors, and the people he sued left and right -- they certainly seem to have reason to claim injury. But the USPS? Hardly


You cannot use federal tax dollars fraudulently, period. That's the whole of the case. Not that USPS didn't get the publicity but rather that Armstrong and tailwind co-owners received what amounts to a government contract fraudulently. It's no different than a gov't contractor failing to deliver on a weapons system because the technology was a hoax, from what I've been told. Im no lawyer so maybe I misunderstood what I was told.
Last edited by: pick6: Feb 5, 13 12:27
Quote Reply
Re: Lance claims unfair treatment [pick6] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Just saw this:

http://www.reuters.com/...dUSBRE91412F20130205


Advanced Aero TopTube Storage for Road, Gravel, & Tri...Direct-mount & ZeroSlip-mount, made in the USA.
DarkSpeedWorks.com....Reviews....Instagram....Facebook

--
Quote Reply
Re: Lance claims unfair treatment [pick6] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
pick6 wrote:
JoeO wrote:
I don't think so. While I doubt the USPS would ever want to spend money to help cyclists dope, the fact is they were spending the money for publicity -- which they received.

If illegal doping is the crime that the government is concerned about, prosecute that. But the notion of "fraud" and the requisite injury still seems to be missing. I think you have to do some serious mental gymnastics to come up with scenario in which USPS was injured by any of this.

Now the competitors, and the people he sued left and right -- they certainly seem to have reason to claim injury. But the USPS? Hardly


You cannot use federal tax dollars fraudulently, period. That's the whole of the case. Not that USPS didn't get the publicity but rather that Armstrong and tailwind co-owners received what amounts to a government contract fraudulently. It's no different than a gov't contractor failing to deliver on a weapons system because the technology was a hoax, from what I've been told. Im no lawyer so maybe I misunderstood what I was told.

But you are glossing over the definition of the word. "Fraud" requires injury. When a contractor fails to deliver the system, the injury is clear for all to see. Where is the injury to the USPS?

(Unless of course, my twenty-cent lawyering is wrong -- a distinct possibility).
Quote Reply
Re: Lance claims unfair treatment [Slowman] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Slowman wrote:
but i don't want to set off everybody's emotions again. lance did what he did, he's paying a heavy price, he should pay a heavy price. i would be upset if he did not pay a heavy price. i just think there's a zero sum psychology to this, where there's X amount of outrage that people have available to expend, and many have decided to expend it all on lance, leaving none left over for other culpable parties.
Wife and I are making our way through Tyler's book (audio-book) and as we read about Postal's preparations for the 2001 TDF, my wife (attorney by profession) really took me by surprise when she stated in a matter-of-fact tone, she felt Lance acted like a psychopath. I considered this for a moment and countered that given the things Tyler mentions in the book as well as what many perceived as a lack of remorse (no conscience or empathy) during the Oprah interview, although he did say he had a lot of work to do, I felt in all seriousness that he 'playing to the room', and has more characteristics of a sociopath than psychopath.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Last edited by: ms6073: Feb 5, 13 15:21
Quote Reply
Re: Lance claims unfair treatment [Slowman] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Slowman wrote:
"that's because the the guy who always saw that big picture has to, in essence, die before the real picture can be seen - a paradox that seems to be confounding the flailing Lance - he refuses to surrender."

yup. no disagreement there. except that i think lance sees it as you do as well, in a way. i think lance sees it as his responsibility to take the biggest fall, to make the biggest apology, to right the biggest wrongs. i don't see anybody else getting sued. i don't see anybody else getting asked for their money back. i don't see anybody else banned (in any consequential way). i don't see anybody else apologizing, really, in any substantial way. i don't think anybody else is being asked by anybody to, in any way, change. i think lance understands that he's going to take the heat for the entire world of cycling....

So IOW Lance has to die for the sins of all cyclingkind? ;)

-----
Two roads diverged in a wood, and I--
I took the one less traveled by,
Which is probably why I was registering 59.67mi as I rolled into T2.

Quote Reply
Re: Lance claims unfair treatment [Eppur si muove] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Cue the photoshopped image of Lance on the cross...
Quote Reply
Re: Lance claims unfair treatment [ms6073] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
" . . .I felt in all seriousness that he was more likely a sociopath than psychopath." (ms6073)


How do you glean this viewpoint from the Oprah interview?

In the interview, the man admitted to doping and he admitted to his failings without blaming anyone or pointing the finger at anyone. Not blaming others shows a conscience and empathy.

How did you (we) want him to behave in this interview? What more did we really expect to learn?

Again, he admitted to doping. Career destroyed. DONE!

Also, Tygart wants him to go under oath and tell his story. What more will Tygart learn that he didn't learn from the other cyclists involved, i.e., Levi, George . .. ?

Again, just not sure what everyone wants from LA now. He's lost a lot.
Last edited by: TriBeer: Feb 5, 13 15:24
Quote Reply
Re: Lance claims unfair treatment [TriBeer] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Tygart probably wants to unveil the corruption within the UCI
Quote Reply

Prev Next