I find it funny that we hear stories from everyone who has gotten popped over the years and they mimic each other in methods drugs etc.

Then people say Frankie, Landis & Hamilton etc are discredited because they lied. Are they liars about things yes. Does that make them a liar about everything? No.

Why can't people see the forest through the trees?

---

Brian Stover USAT LII
Accelerate3 Coaching
Insta

High level athletes are constantly told how special they are, directly or indirectly, most likely since they were kids. Take that away and then what?

I would submit that we don't know what "the truth" is, simply because in order to write and sell a book you have to write a story that is juicy enough. There are certainly enough memoir scandals in recent years to prove that you can't trust them. (and this has nothing to do with Lance.)

Where did you see this? Of course it still doesn't change the fact that people are trumpeting how LA got everyone to dope at USPS and he was the big doping kingpin (heck, that's why Tygart wanted to bring him down..to save cycling!)

Eric, good call :)......My statement.....I know exactly how doping was done in the pro peleton for a number of years, in fact, I know how you still could dope and never get caught (Floyd almost had it right, but got drunk that one night)......do I think the LA doped, in my simple opinion yes, do I think he was the only one, I'm laughing as I type this, no.
The issue I have is there is no smoking gun, just a bunch of very motivated witnesses (intimidation by USADA is very motivating), and a whole bunch of scientific nothing....Justice should be blind, with no bias, it should be fair, and seen to be fair.....innocent until "proven" guilty, not alledged...........this point of view may go back to my relative being sent to the Virginia colony for "stealing a loaf of bread" (no trial, husband not told, despite her being pregnant, and that he owned the bakery !!!!)

Why do I think LA stopped fighting....eventually he would have been in the Roger Clemens position, with no opportunity to take the 5th, and having to prove his innocence instead of the USADA proving his guilt.....now the USADA will have to show their cards in a future hearing, and LA then restart the crap throwing.

Really just one positive test, just one, is that too much to ask for....this would have been so much easier, and this forum would have to find something else to throw monkey poo about

---

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

Lance said he had doped while being treated for cancer.

Lance is being brought down because he is famous/ infamous... the boss... the most famous cyclist of this generation... who managed to evade sanction during his career. Why waste tremendous resources pursuing little fish, when you can bag the Great White? Systematic doping on Postal would not have happen without his encouragement... and possibly his demand.

One positive test? Really, it would of made a difference? Why? Lance is beloved more than Tyler or Floyd ever were and when their positive test first came out, how many believed they were innocent? Look on these threads how Contrador was treated unfair. If there was one the same spin of witch hunt, unfair, cannot trust the process would of come out and it would be the same as it is now. There is plenty of evidence that would be allowed in any court of law. Your choice to believe if there is enough evidence or not.

Lance allegedly said he had doped. Which as even denied by the doctor. Of course once again this does not disprove what I said, but keep trying to push the "Lance is the bad man who made everyone in cycling dope" angle that Tygart wants everyone to believe.

Quote:

Systematic doping on Postal would not have happen without his encouragement... and possibly his demand.

COME ON. you damn well know it would have happened with our without him.

Would you, or if you have children would you let them, join a team sponsored by LA, with Bruyneel as DS and Ferrari as the team doctor?

More from Tyler:

http://www.cyclingnews.com/...tm_campaign=features

What truly surprised me in this whole story is how corrupt the UCI is...

---

-

The Triathlon Squad

Like us on Facebook!!!

I'm shocked shocked shocked that the guy who defied the ban on competing in apartheid South Africa is of questionable moral character.

X2.

---

"How wonderful it is that nobody need wait a single moment before starting to improve the world." ~Anne Frank

It's too bad that he went down the road and now is taking it out on others.
I knew Tyler, raced with him. Nice, quiet, soft spoken guy.
I can remember back in 1998 in our local crit series after Tyler came back from camp with USPS he started lapping the field every week he was there. There were some big engines there and he made us feel like grand moms on trikes. The year before it was neck and neck.

Make sense now when I think about it for sure! 2% makes you lap a 1.5 miles circuit pretty quickly!

---

CyclingSessions

BelieveLance.com website is coming soon.

Followed by the BelieveUCI.com quickly thereafter.

---

Suffer Well.

The simplest way is probably plasma dilution. You learn in advance of your pending test (a test which looks for elevated numbers of red blood cells per unit volume), so your doctor sits you down with a saline drip and monitors your blood cell concentration until it is within passing limits. Then you head over to the test, pleased as punch because you are clean as a whistle.

I am interested to learn of his dealings, if he tells it, of working with Dr. Checchini whom he called "a great friend" back in the CSC/Phonak days. And of course, Checchini being "Mr. 60/Riis" doctor during his rein. It surprises me Checchini has not been called to task like Ferarri has.

I am also fascinated that no ones seems to be outlining how Phonak's ownership and directors are all running BMC now but that's another story entirely.

---

@rhyspencer

So you continue to ignore/deny the positive test(s) that were swept under the rug? Just because no positives were formally announced/prosecuted does not mean they never existed.

Bad example if you're a Lance apologist. Canseco has been 100% right on basically everything.

That's what omerta means my friend!

That's apparently explained in great detail in Hamilton's book.

Really, it's easy. There's no test for blood doping, and EPO leaves the system quite quickly. So unless you're a total moron and are shooting EPO right before a stage instead of the day or week before, you won't get busted. Never mind that during the first part of the 'EPO era' there wasn't a test at all.

It's easy to beat a test when the test for what you're doing doesn't exist.

This kills me above all else... They lied before about being clean, so now that they fess up it's gotta be bunk because they're known liars. WTF?!? Simple logic exercise tells us it's not factually possible that they were lying in both cases; they either doped, or they didn't. So which is more credible, that they were lying before when they still had a contract/team to protect, or making shit up now that they have nothing to lose?

My favorite analog is the climate change deniers who try to discredit climate scientists, not with better data but simply by pointing out there was a time when it was believed the Earth was cooling... as if we must assume the science obviously can't be trusted ever again because they were wrong in the past. So by that reasoning, because it was once widely believed that the Earth was flat, all the scientific observations since that time which point to a round planet must not be credible. Apparently the science is all smoke & mirrors; and yet the Earth still exists in one form or another.

So then which is it? Is the Earth still flat? If the liar says he lied, then what's left to believe? Do the Lance-huggers' heads implode in logical contradiction, or are their brains simply not able to step back from the conundrum and re-evaluate the observable input?

Never mind your logic argument (which is sound)...

Hamilton in particular is putting himself in the crosshairs of one of the most famously litigious people in the country. Lance has his lawyers on speed-dial - shit, he probably just has them on hold, 24/7. He's sued an incredibly long list of people, for all sorts of shit.

The USA has libel laws. If what Hamilton says in his book is untrue - even a little of it - he has CERTAINLY opened himself up to a libel suit worth millions. If he's lying, Lance will take every penny he makes from this book and then some.

If Lance decides not to sue, on the other hand...........

You couldn't help yourself I see

JSA wrote:

I am going to ask what is potentially a really stupid question, so, don't tear into me too much. We keep hearing how these guys doped for years. When are we going to learn how they beat all the testing? I know EPO testing has not been around forever, but, what I want to hear from these guys is how did they beat the testing?

Even though he's been raked over the coals here for not being a lawyer, for being exasperated with the whole situation, and for, well, maybe being of a somewhat caustic disposition, Ashenden explains it all in pretty good detail: http://nyvelocity.com/...009/michael-ashenden

It works for me as far as I understand the science and the scientific process in general.

---

Citizen of the world, former drunkard. Resident Traumatic Brain Injury advocate.