Lance: "Enough is enough..."

Surprised there isn't a topic on this already...

Sad news today if you are a cycling fan as Lance Armstrong is going to stop fighting the (supposed) doping charges against him:

http://espn.go.com/olympics/cycling/story/_/id/8298135/usada-said-friday-officially-banned-lance-armstrong-life-stripping-seven-tour-de-france-titles-charges-used-performance-enhancing-drugs-cycling-career

I am curious to hear people's thoughts?

It's hard not to believe there is a smoking gun and Lance was given the option to 'resign before being fired'. At least that is what the conspiracy theorists (myself included) will think...

I think the whole sport is dirty and we all know it, so why the continued witch hunt? Who at the USADA did Lance piss off??

Agree with Michele. Everyone doped and probably still does, if their team can afford it. It's part of professional cycling culture. Who cares? None of us could even come close to what he did with all the drugs in the world.

Perhaps the lawyers on this board can chime in, but I don't understand how USADA is able to force arbitration and not allow jury trials. It's pretty easy to go 15-2 (or whatever obscene stats) when it's home rules. Given that the statute of limitations ran out on his first two titles, those should not even be in the discussion. As a juror, I'd throw out those first two and only consider the last 5.

What's more important to me in this case isn't that he cheated and did what everyone else did during those years without being caught(at the time), but is the continued erosion of civil liberties for Americans in all areas of life--Supreme Court, reproduction, fertility, health care, right to vote, education, food choice, etc.

Back on topic, it is important to recognize that Lance gave back to many thousands more through his foundation than the titles he gained from PED use.

I wish we knew the truth here, it's impossible to really know. From all I can see, he is convicted based on people's testimony without any physical proof.

Diego wrote:

Back on topic, it is important to recognize that Lance gave back to many thousands more through his foundation than the titles he gained from PED use.

Here is where I am a little torn though. From the Outside Magazine article in January of this year:

“The issue with Lance Armstrong isn’t whether he has done good for cancer victims,” accounting professor Mark Zimbelman wrote on his blog Fraudbytes, in a post comparing Mortenson to Armstrong, “but rather, whether he first cheated to beat his opponents, then used his fraudulent titles to help promote an organization that appears to do good but also enriches a fraudster.”

Diego wrote:Perhaps the lawyers on this board can chime in, but I don't understand how USADA is able to force arbitration and not allow jury trials.

Isn't it because this isn't a criminal charge against him, but a charge of rules violations in cycling, thus it follows the rules established by UCI and not "the law", so to speak.

Look, you don't "give up the fight" if you're innocent, knowing your titles will be stripped and your legacy tainted forever. Obviously he knew the evidence they have against him (some of which IS scientific and not just based on the testimony of others) and he didn't want that evidence to go public, which is what would have happened if he chose to move on to the next step.

He should have just admitted it. If baseball is any example, guys who admit it get forgiven pretty quickly (Pettite, A-Rod, etc.) and guys who deny it are vilified (Bonds, McGwire, etc.).

Ben Z wrote: he first cheated to beat his opponents, then used his fraudulent titles to help promote an organization that appears to do good but also enriches a fraudster.”

Exactly. Lets not forget that for all the good Lance has done for cancer research, and that certainly can't be denied, he himself has also become extremely wealthy from LiveStrong, and LiveStrong only became as popular as it did because of the heroic and amazing story of Lance, which now seems to have been a fraud. So its hard to know how to feel because he's done so much good, but cheated in order to get that opportunity, and became wealthy because of it.

Another example of guilty until proven innocent.

1. Who cares if he did it, got famous, and raised a SHIT LOAD of money for cancer research? Who cares how he did it? He got the conversation started. He got people to donate, to volunteer, he started a ton of awareness. Period.
2. If I was pestered about this shit for years on end after I retired, I would stop caring, too.
3. All of that said, he doped. So did EVERYONE in the peloton.

Remember, he has NEVER failed a drug test. And I believe I heard no athlete has ever been tested more than he has.

I agree, it's a little hard to understand his just giving up knowing they were going to label him a cheater and strip his titles. But he has been dealing with these accusations since the late 90's, and I can see him being tired of it.

I for one would like to think he didn't cheat. But we'll never know for sure.

BTW, any of you read his book? It's a great read.

Mike MacLellan wrote:1. Who cares if he did it, got famous, and raised a SHIT LOAD of money for cancer research? Who cares how he did it? He got the conversation started. He got people to donate, to volunteer, he started a ton of awareness. Period.
2. If I was pestered about this shit for years on end after I retired, I would stop caring, too.
3. All of that said, he doped. So did EVERYONE in the peloton.

This is one of my problems with Lance and Livestrong. We like to use the 'he did good for cancer' excuse too readily I think. Would it be OK if he robbed a bank and gave the money to cancer research? How about a ponzi scheme? Where do you draw the line?

One thing we all need to understand. Livestrong donated $20 million to cancer research between 1998-2005. Since then it has phased out donating to cancer research proposals and given nothing in the last three years. Livestrong does not fund cancer research. Period.

EugeneGreenie wrote:Another example of guilty until proven innocent.

I'm with you but why else would he stop fighting? Think about what this means for Livestrong? We associate the two together - if he really didn't do it would he readily jeopardize the future of Livestrong too?

I'm just saddened by this on so many levels.

Ben Z wrote:

Mike MacLellan wrote:1. Who cares if he did it, got famous, and raised a SHIT LOAD of money for cancer research? Who cares how he did it? He got the conversation started. He got people to donate, to volunteer, he started a ton of awareness. Period.
2. If I was pestered about this shit for years on end after I retired, I would stop caring, too.
3. All of that said, he doped. So did EVERYONE in the peloton.

This is one of my problems with Lance and Livestrong. We like to use the 'he did good for cancer' excuse too readily I think. Would it be OK if he robbed a bank and gave the money to cancer research? How about a ponzi scheme? Where do you draw the line?

One thing we all need to understand. Livestrong donated $20 million to cancer research between 1998-2005. Since then it has phased out donating to cancer research proposals and given nothing in the last three years. Livestrong does not fund cancer research. Period.

Lance didn't promise anyone anything for their money. No one can say that his alleged doping caused harm to anyone (other than himself) in the process, too. Not even close to robbing a bank (gov't money ---> taxpayers) or a Ponzi scheme (promised something back).

I haven't read through all the post on this thread so I won't comment directly to them. But what I would like to add is that I think that it is sad that today's athlete's feel the need to dope to be their best. Whatever happen to the day were an athlete achieved their dreams and goals with the God given talent that they were blessed with? To be honest in a way I don't care what Lance did because it is his body and his choices to make in life to do with his body that he chooses.

The part that is sad is or least for me as an athlete would be knowing that I was only the best or won because I cheated. For me personal it goes against all that I stand for as a person. I would feel that I have not only cheated the athlete's I competed against but the sport itself and the spirit of sport. I view sport as a platform for one to exhibit one's natural talent, effort, hard work and mental toughness to be not only one's best but to express what the human body and mind can do with the natural talents and ability that it was given. I feel more drawn to and at awe of not only myself but other athlete's when one does something that is of greatness (no matter of winning or finishing last) and to the best of their ability because they have done it and they did it clean vs using something that is chemical made that gives the false impression that one is great.

I will leave all with this thought, I am puzzled at today's professional athlete no matter what sport that they find the need to not only harm and put toxic substances in there body to be the best when in actuality they are all ready the best! Not only are they best of their sports but they are admired by thousands for the God given talent that they possess already. And I would think that for almost all of them they made it to that point naturally in the first place!

Mike MacLellan wrote:

Lance didn't promise anyone anything for their money. No one can say that his alleged doping caused harm to anyone (other than himself) in the process, too. Not even close to robbing a bank (gov't money ---> taxpayers) or a Ponzi scheme (promised something back).

I completely disagree. What about any clean riders he beat in the process who missed out on more money and fame by finishing on the podium? What about the people who could have received his sponsor's money that instead went to a (supposed) cheat? The list could go on and on.

As long as kids continue to be brainwashed that in order to be successful, valued and loved you need to win there will always be cheaters.

Implying the sponsors are clean themselves... If we want to start talking morality, bringing advertisers into the picture is a weak counterpoint.

The latest athletes to test positive for PEDs (Bartolo Colon and Melky Cabrera) prove that it happens in most sports. I think that reason so many get by without positive test results is because the drugs are made to leave the body quickly, sometimes in as little as 12 hours. This means the odds of testing positive are very slim...

That being said, we will never truely know who is and who is not "juiced."

Lazy Jerry really needs some juice. Anyone know someone that can help?

Some thoughts after reading more on all this... What exactly qualifies doping? Must it provide neurological stimulation? An increase in red blood cells? Delay the catabolism of muscle tissue? Simply provide more energy?

This kind of brings me back to the whole thing about "I don't take anything that alters my state of mind," because FOOD does. A banana will cause your blood sugar to rise which, if you're exercising, will be used and accompanied by a sense of more energy (there are studies in which just placing sugar-water on the tongue, not swallowing, cause the brain to send messages to the body that fuel is coming). Likewise, the caffeine in coffee is shown to have an effect of lowering RPE during exercise.

So, what qualifies doping?

Mike MacLellan wrote:Some thoughts after reading more on all this... What exactly qualifies doping? Must it provide neurological stimulation? An increase in red blood cells? Delay the catabolism of muscle tissue? Simply provide more energy?

This kind of brings me back to the whole thing about "I don't take anything that alters my state of mind," because FOOD does. A banana will cause your blood sugar to rise which, if you're exercising, will be used and accompanied by a sense of more energy (there are studies in which just placing sugar-water on the tongue, not swallowing, cause the brain to send messages to the body that fuel is coming). Likewise, the caffeine in coffee is shown to have an effect of lowering RPE during exercise.

So, what qualifies doping?

I eat a lot of bananas. I must be a dope addict! That was a funny as an analogy comparing Food (Banana) to "doping". Not sure if that will hold up in court, but certainly entertaining to read on here.

While I believe that Lance did take PEDs, I also believe that he is doing the right thing by dropping out of the fight. I think he's getting great advice from someone.

First, the isn't likely to be any smoking gun, because a 2 year criminal investigation closed for lack of evidence. What physical evidence there may be is likely very shaky and easily called into question in a court of law (a 'B' sample from 'x' years ago).

Second, in arbitration the USADA would present a handful of former teammates/associates who would all testify about their knowledge of the blood doping program and Lance's involvement in it. Lance would be asked directly about his participation... creating the moment where he denies it directly under examination. With a bunch of former associates saying he did it, and him saying he didn't, it becomes a question of nothing more than 'what's more believable, Lance lying, or all these other people?' Still, that's just heresay evidence in a court of law, but in artbitration it's considered relevant. The likely outcome would be that he's considered guilty.

So... now the media attention around the case will have caused a lot of potentially negative spin against Lance and hurt Livestrong and his sponsor deals. For what?

By dropping it now and letting the USADA have its ruling, Lance moves on and will continue to be (in most people's minds) the only 7 time winner of the TdF. Most of us who believe Lance was involved really don't care, because we know that it wasn't PEDs that gave him the talent, drive, and determination to train that hard, for that long, to be the best. PEDs may have helped him, but they don't define him. The man kept coming back year after year... and beat the best.

Cheers to Lance. The best dirty cyclist in an international field of dirty cyclists. The 7 time TdF winner. The founder and primary spokeperson for Livestrong. Ride on, dude. You deserve better than this.

I am not doubting that Lance is a talented athlete. I just wonder how many TDFs he would have won clean...4??

Kenny - Maybe, but who is to say that the conventions in court are "right"? If the phrase of choice is "performance-enhancing," food is. That's my point. All chemicals have an effect on us. They either help or hinder.

Matt - Exactly. Regardless of what went in his body, AMAZING things came out of it that will probably never be repeated.