All of your posts are like a feedback loop...

---

---

Heath Dotson
HD Coaching:Website |Twitter: 140 Characters or Less|Facebook:Follow us on Facebook

Ugh, give me a break. If USADA was really into stopping doping in all athletic events they would pursue the NFL and HGH testing with a lot more vigor, of course the NFL players union has not agreed to it (not to mention most NFL players get advanced notice of drug tests anyway) and a lot more money changes hands in the NFL than meager little cycling.

What a joke.

---

http://www.facebook.com/ReconFoundationTeam
http://www.facebook.com/MarineReconFoundation
http://www.reconfoundation.org

until the union agrees nothing USADA can do. and their mandate is olympic sports.

Protect the Rights of U.S. Athletes — We protect the right of U.S. Olympic and Paralympic athletes to compete healthy and clean — to achieve their own personal victories as a result of unwavering commitment and hard work — to be celebrated as true heroes.

Read what I wrote - I was asking about this person's beliefs. Mine did not come into it.

Care to rethink that argument? USADA has no jurisdiction over the NFL. But the opposite argument could be made -- if the NFL were serious about doping, they would sign onto the WADA code and subject themselves to WADA/USADA jurisdiction.

Sure it did, I was responding to your response. ;)

What about his testimony of how to mirco dose EPO so as to avoid detection. Or the method and cost associated with setting up a doping institution at Phonak. Even ignoring the Lance aspect, Landis provided quite a lot of credible, easily verifiable information, that I think is valuable.

“So let me get this straight ... come in and tell them exactly what they wanted to hear and you get complete immunity AND anonymity? I never got that offer,” Armstrong wrote in an email to The Associated Press. “This isn’t about Tygart wanting to clean up cycling — rather it’s just a plain ol’ selective prosecution that reeks of vendetta.”

http://forum.slowtwitch.com/...rent_post_id=4027703

Secretly leak a false story to the press about special treatment, then publicly complain about the special treatment.

If USADA is as righteous, error free, effective and the champion of clean athleticism as they would like to believe that they are wouldn't you think that the NFL would be chomping at the bit to be under their jurisdiction.


Secondly, and totally unrelated to my prior comment, why is there no apparent systematic doping in female cycling? Does it not happen or is Kristin Armstrong or any other female cyclist for that matter not a big enough name for anyone at USADA/WADA to give a crap about?

---

http://www.facebook.com/ReconFoundationTeam
http://www.facebook.com/MarineReconFoundation
http://www.reconfoundation.org

x2.

-Robert

---

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

That would depend on whether the NFL actually want to stop doping or just pay lip service to the issue.

Many female cyclists have been caught doping, so yes there is doping in female cycling and WADA is trying to stop it.

If USADA is as righteous, error free, effective and the champion of clean athleticism as they would like to believe that they are wouldn't you think that the NFL would be chomping at the bit to be under their jurisdiction.

Assuming the NFL is serious about its anti-doping efforts and that there aren't any competing interests, then yes. But those are pretty big and likely false assumptions. Putting aside how serious they truly are about anti-doping, the NFL would still need the consent of the union (or imposition after impasse) before signing on to the WADA code, and there's no way the union would ever agree to two year suspensions for a first offense and lifetime bans for a second. And then there's the question of whether management would even approve ceding control to an outside agency.

By the way, I don't think even USADA's strongest supporters would characterize them as rightious and error free. But I don't think any reasonable person would think that's the standard.

Secondly, and totally unrelated to my prior comment, why is there no apparent systematic doping in female cycling? Does it not happen or is Kristin Armstrong or any other female cyclist for that matter not a big enough name for anyone at USADA/WADA to give a crap about?

There is doping in women's cycling. And women cyclists have been suspended by USADA. If it's not as pervasive and systematic as in men's cycling, that may be because there isn't as much money involved. Other than pure ignorance, I don't know why you would think USADA doesn't give a crap about doping in women's cycling or any other sport that it has jurisdiction over.

In fact, on or about the very day the Armstrong investigation broke, USADA announced a 6-month suspension for a woman cyclist (BMX?).

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

Is Lance realy the big fish ?

Thom

---

Slowtwitch bitchist place on planet earth

For what it's worth, Big George did not win a "heroic mountain stage". He was part of a breakaway that the peleton decided not to chase because the GC guys were all too far back. Big George had to manage to stay with two excellent climbers on a single, admittedly tough climb. He was by far the better sprinter so once he managed to get within the last bit, it was all over.

Still a great win but hardly the evidence of doping that people want to make it out to be.

Seriously, when he was a rider all he did was whine about how unfair the doping rules are wah i got a bee sting now I can't ride because I'm so clean. Then when he is a DS he is all against dopers, except when he can hire ex dopers. then when the growing list of guys on his team end up banned he drops them because he is shocked shocked i tell you that guys would dope. What concerted effort has he made other than saying I'm not not going to stand for someone doing what I did while I whined about how clean i was, unless I can sign them after the fact for half their salary.

---

Styrrell

Sweet, good on them. Also I never said anything about all sports they govern, just over women's cycling, maybe it's not their fault that the major news agencies don't cover those sanctions. Perhaps it's them that don't give a crap about women's cycling and sanctions against them.

Let me put it another way, if Lance won and he wasn't clean (as has been said, or alluded to by so many) there is no way in hell that Kristin Armstrong is clean. Period. Of course this is assuming that neither of the two are just amazing athletes with incredible potential....

---

http://www.facebook.com/ReconFoundationTeam
http://www.facebook.com/MarineReconFoundation
http://www.reconfoundation.org

Nor should his prior suspension for dopuing.

---

Styrrell

1. because the players make huge contracts by being the strongest physical specimen possible. everyone doping is afraid not doping means a lost job. thats why the union is in the way. Even if USADA was perfect, the guys doping dont want to give up what they have

2. Because theres not enough money in female cycling (in the US anyways) to pay for an organized program. most of those women other than 1 or 2 big names are lucky enough to get equipment and meal money and a few who trade on their looks or raw talent might not have to take a second job by getting decent individual sponsorship. Sure theres doping in womens cycling. But organized team led doping would be far too expensive to carry out on the limited budgets they have, and they dont have even the extra equipment to pay for it through equipment sales

Every top finish is suspect right. I mean, if you beat a doper, you have to be a doper yourself. Right?

Thats certainly a spin on what he did. How about he supports giving 2nd chances to former dopers, maybe some who others wouldnt, puts them in an environment where they dont feel forced to doped to succeed. Ask them as a team how happy they are (other than Tyler who has fallen 3 straight days, hes not in a talking mood right now) to be in the environment they are where their results are second to doing it clean as a group.

  
Big George had to manage to stay with two excellent climbers on a single, admittedly tough climb.

this is the part the writer may want to re think.

---

Styrrell

What's interesting to me is that if they found something odd in Armstrong's data, there's a whole lot of fish to fry from 2010 that were the same or worse by the standards of 2010

http://www.cyclingnews.com/...-2010-tour-de-france

By this reasoning, if I discuss how to overthrow the USA government with my barber I'm a traitor? Don't you see what a slippery slope this is? If you are going to have a drug program, you must be able to find a positive drug test before you hound someone to death with innuendo from people who really don't know what was done, when, and how. This witch hunt for LA looks like an agency that is trying to fight for a reputation they don't have by taking down some big fish.

IF LA had tested positive in any sample (and, suspicious isn't positive) then under the rules he could easily have been sanctioned and should have been.

What they should have done long ago is to shortened these grand tours, thereby reducing the load on the athletes. Instead, the sponsors and public always want more. Just like NFL players are expected to be bigger, stronger, faster each year. It's not an accident that one of the big stats in the NFL is the average weight of, say, an offensive line. It's always more....

Another thing they can do, if the sponsors and public won't get realistic, is to stop testing for drugs, or limit testing so very few cyclists get caught, as in the NFL/MLB/NBA. If the major athletics organzations had instituted the kind of draconian testing we see in cycling, those sports would be suffering even more public ridicule than they are now. But, most of the public has moved on, and you will find few people who think many of their favorite athletes are clean and they really don't care about the issue very much. When your country is having so many problems, drug testing athletes seems like the work of effete bureaucrats who are out of touch with reality.

Knowing the difference between what can be done and what should be done is the hallmark of a mature social/political culture. The Europeans are just as bad as the USA in making these distinctions.

-Robert

---

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

he really has to choose


he can be the clean team that doesn't approve of doping and takes a hard line, but he really has to come clean about His past and explain it thenj, rather than beoijg lowkey and evasive.

or he can be like every one else and hire known dopers and say the past is the past, but shit up about how holier tha n thou his team is, but if his team is so proactive and they really don't care about results if they have to get them by doping why do riders on the team keep getting sanctioned, including one this week.

---

Styrrell