http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/six-former-armstrong-usps-teammates-receive-bans-from-usada

There it is.

John

---

---

Top notch coaching: Francois and Accelerate3 | Follow on Twitter: LifetimeAthlete |

yes! Apu worked 72 straight hours and became delusional. he thought he was a hummingbird. ah, good stuff.

does USADA say this anywhere? or just cyclingnews?

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

The BBC are running the story too, Dan, so I expect it has been verified:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/cycling/19917856


5 team-mates receive 6mo bans from USADA.

Nothing listed on the Sanctions list from what i can see:

http://www.usada.org/sanctions/

---

-----------------------------------
team website: http://snappletriteam.com/

team blog: http://snappletriteam.com/?page_id=10

Slowman wrote:

does USADA say this anywhere? or just cyclingnews?

I found it here
http://www.usacycling.org/...er/story.php?id=8005

---

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** * * *
http://www.bobswims.com/

"If you didn't swallow water in your last open water race, you weren't racing"

Guys, the bans are on the USADA website!

http://cyclinginvestigation.usada.org/

Go to the VERY bottom

yes, but, here's what's strange. i have NEVER seen anyone banned by USADA without there being a formal announcement with specificity as to the bans. cyclingnews is a british site. i can see the bbc just reading that site and parroting it. heck, the nyt wrote its lance article yesterday in some part off of reading our forum. they called me for quotes, but i was too busy with kona stuff. these large newspapers rely on endemic online sites for their facts more than you might want to think. they're not dialed in. so, i'd like to see it official from USADA.

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

Here ya go:

http://cyclinginvestigation.usada.org/

Right at the bottom

What doesnt make sense to me is USADA seemed to be just waiting to hit the SEND button on Lance's sanctions at the deadline when he failed to continue the process. Now this is the part I'm fuzzy with, because I'm assuming all these charges to the athletes are part of the files that were released to UCI, but why has USADA not also sent out an statement on their sanctions? If it's about "protecting" them, well they are already outed, so it doesnt seem to be about saving info for the other cases still to go on. So is it the investigation that is keeping it from being "officially" released, or what?

ETA: The link to USADA's statement is linked above my post from USADA. Thanks!

---

------------------
@brooksdoughtie
USAT-L2,Y&J; USAC-L2
http://www.aomultisport.com

Slowman wrote:

yes, but, here's what's strange. i have NEVER seen anyone banned by USADA without there being a formal announcement with specificity as to the bans. cyclingnews is a british site. i can see the bbc just reading that site and parroting it. heck, the nyt wrote its lance article yesterday in some part off of reading our forum. they called me for quotes, but i was too busy with kona stuff. these large newspapers rely on endemic online sites for their facts more than you might want to think. they're not dialed in. so, i'd like to see it official from USADA.

From USA Cycling Website:

"USA Cycling has been notified by the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency (USADA) that five U.S. riders — Tom Danielson, George Hincapie, Levi Leipheimer, Christian Vande Velde and David Zabriskie — have each accepted six-month suspensions, effective Sept. 1, 2012, as a result of their testimony in the Lance Armstrong investigation. USA Cycling will enforce these sanctions and is currently reviewing the impact of the sanctions on historical results"

---

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** * * *
http://www.bobswims.com/

"If you didn't swallow water in your last open water race, you weren't racing"

It is just a bunch of BS that USADA is treating these 11 drug cheats like heroes. Like they all came forward on their own.

If you read Levi's deposition, it seems like they sort of did - at least some of them.

I did laugh at some of the language they used to describe these guys. You read that press release and it sounds as if they are going to build statues of them as they are some celebrated heros in the fight against doping.

---

------------------
@brooksdoughtie
USAT-L2,Y&J; USAC-L2
http://www.aomultisport.com

They were given special treatment to give the statements. They were also forced before a grand jury. So it is not like they came forward on their own.

Really nothing to add. I forget who said it but essentially he said "I play the games for free but I get paid to practice."
I'm just bored

---

---------------------------------------
Fruit snacks are for winners

At the end of the day I will still love being on my road bike. I will still love watching racing on TV.


Yeah, I do agree with you on this. I still love to watch the competition.

Liberty Seguros had an orginized doping program in 2004 from what I read. Alberto Contador was there in 2004 and starts winning in 2005. Got caught up in Operation Puerto in 2006. Finally tests positive in 2010.

I am suprised by all the drugs these riders took not knowing themselves exactly what they were taking.

Here is Zabriskie's. the rest are all in the same place in Appendix AA on the cyclinginvestigation.usada.org page.

http://d3epuodzu3wuis.cloudfront.net/...briskie.executed.pdf

Why. I thought was important was that process and rules were followed. Remember, process, process, process, that is more important than anything else, even if someone is guilty, process, so here is a paste of why the reduced sentence.......it followed the process. on the link scroll and please read the second paragraph, or first one after the "points" as in article 10.5.3


http://d3epuodzu3wuis.cloudfront.net/...briskie.executed.pdf
So rules process followed. Just like it was for Mr. Armstrong

I didn't say anything about process. I said it was BS to hold them up as heroes. They are not heroes they are dopers and cheaters like Lance. Yes part of their awards were taken away but USADA shouldn't hold them up like the second coming. It is also funny they all stopped drug use in 2006.

Obvioulsy it's about the process, but if this is the process to clean up the sport, either USADA isnt really following it's own mission ideas, or it needs to add *'s.

It states:

Our mission is to protect clean athletes by preserving the integrity of competition not only for today’s athletes but also the athletes of tomorrow.



How this investigation was handled, they essentially obviously have compromised some of the integirity of competitions this past cycling season. As we've stated in past discussions, if this is the process it needs to bust athletes, well I for one dont like parts of the process. Just dont preach the mission statement of preserving the integrity of the sport. This investigation has clearly shown, they pick and choose when they want to actually preserve that.

---

------------------
@brooksdoughtie
USAT-L2,Y&J; USAC-L2
http://www.aomultisport.com

They all agreed to have amnesia starting in 2006. Interestingly, many of their performances did not decline with their dope free choice, so on one hand they need dope to compete, yet on the other hand they don't need it anymore to compete (that's pretty much what gh said in his testimony). It would be interesting odds, 1 out of xxxxxxx, to calculate the likelihood of long time cycling dopers deciding to go cold turkey on their various teams all starting the same year, when the peloton was known to be dirty.

Someone earlier, made an interesting comment about GH's comments. He said he doped to begin his career so that he could stay in the peloton, yet suddenly in 2006, he didnt need to dope to keep up.

---

------------------
@brooksdoughtie
USAT-L2,Y&J; USAC-L2
http://www.aomultisport.com

 

>How this investigation was handled, they essentially obviously have compromised some of the integirity of competitions this past cycling >season.

What do you mean? ( I guess it's not that obvious to me )