My views wouldn't be jaded if they actually conducted a proper investigation of Armstrong during his title years...but obviously if they did and if they caught him early enough it would have cost the sport and people associated with him mega $$$$. Now these former cyclist want one final big paycheck and all hope to land a book deal...HYPOCRITES.
Wouldn't call being on sportsnet or tsn a major accomplishment since both these networks shows darts and poker as time fillers.
this is why you actually should read the case before commenting ... :fp:
the UCI was responsible for drug testing back then ... of course, they had everything to gain from lance not testing positive ... so, they were complicit ... i have said it throughout this thread ... the UCI needs to have a truth and reconciliation commission and they need to own up to their part in this fraud ...
but the reality is now - the cyclists that have come forward may have ulterior motives but it doesn't change the facts of the case ...
lance armstrong doped to win his 7 tdf titles
lance armstrong bullied and established a code of silence (omerta) in pro cycling
lance armsrtong is a liar
lance armstrong is a fraud
lance armstrong has the moral fortitude of a turd
The same could be said for everyone involved with cycling during the Armstrong years...the only reason anyones coming forward now is $$$$ they hope to gain from book deals or a movie.
The USADA was open for business in 2001 they could have investigated him then...surely they heard the accusations!!! The whole sport is full of HYPOCRITES!! or did he bully the USADA as well. I was bullied thats why I didn't speak up ... more like Lance reminded them that he was making everyone a lot of $$$$ ... then when they all got busted or are out of the sport ...lets write a tell all book .... $$$$, all everyone sees is $$$$ signs.
I have certain rules I live by ... My First Rule ... I don't believe anything the government tells me ... George Carlin
"Life Is What Happens To You When Your Busy Making Other Plans" John Lennon
The same could be said for everyone involved with cycling during the Armstrong years...the only reason anyones coming forward now is $$$$ they hope to gain from book deals or a movie.
The USADA was open for business in 2001 they could have investigated him then...surely they heard the accusations!!! The whole sport is full of HYPOCRITES!! or did he bully the USADA as well. I was bullied thats why I didn't speak up ... more like Lance reminded them that he was making everyone a lot of $$$$ ... then when they all got busted or are out of the sport ...lets write a tell all book .... $$$$, all everyone sees is $$$$ signs.
no one made more money off cycling than lance armstrong
listen ... it's absurd having this conversation because your opinion (which you have every right to) is simply not based on any reality ... all the cyclists have said that they have come forward in the interests of the sport ... you don't want to believe that - that's fine ... but you are making outrageous assumptions based on absolutely zero understanding of the cyclists you are accusing and the sport itself ... you are essentially insulting the integrity of everyone of these people who are about to face sanctions for breaking the code of silence in order to defend basically a douchebag ...
so ... feel free to label these guys as greedy and continue to defend a fraud ... your choice but i'd only wish you knew what you were talking about ...
The same could be said for everyone involved with cycling during the Armstrong years...the only reason anyones coming forward now is $$$$ they hope to gain from book deals or a movie.
The USADA was open for business in 2001 they could have investigated him then...surely they heard the accusations!!! The whole sport is full of HYPOCRITES!! or did he bully the USADA as well. I was bullied thats why I didn't speak up ... more like Lance reminded them that he was making everyone a lot of $$$$ ... then when they all got busted or are out of the sport ...lets write a tell all book .... $$$$, all everyone sees is $$$$ signs.
no one made more money off cycling than lance armstrong
listen ... it's absurd having this conversation because your opinion (which you have every right to) is simply not based on any reality ... all the cyclists have said that they have come forward in the interests of the sport ... you don't want to believe that - that's fine ... but you are making outrageous assumptions based on absolutely zero understanding of the cyclists you are accusing and the sport itself ... you are essentially insulting the integrity of everyone of these people who are about to face sanctions for breaking the code of silence in order to defend basically a douchebag ...
so ... feel free to label these guys as greedy and continue to defend a fraud ... your choice but i'd only wish you knew what you were talking about ...
actually I don't really think I'm defending anybody by my comments today ... I have defended him in the past ... what I'm not defending is the people involved with cycling who made a ton of $$$ off Armstrong and could stand to make more ... HYPOCRITES. The funny thing of this whole deal is that Armstrong will probably write a book that will outsell all their books combined. They were doping as well...so what does that say about them? If some of them were never caught I doubt they'd have come forward. That whole sport been a joke for quite sometime.
I have certain rules I live by ... My First Rule ... I don't believe anything the government tells me ... George Carlin
"Life Is What Happens To You When Your Busy Making Other Plans" John Lennon
actually I don't really think I'm defending anybody by my comments today ... I have defended him in the past ... what I'm not defending is the people involved with cycling who made a ton of $$$ off Armstrong and could stand to make more ... HYPOCRITES. The funny thing of this whole deal is that Armstrong will probably write a book that will outsell all their books combined. They were doping as well...so what does that say about them? If some of them were never caught I doubt they'd have come forward. That whole sport been a joke for quite sometime.
again ... read the affidavits ... you know not what you are talking about ... you calling these cyclists who have lost all their results from the past and are about to face a ban hypocrites and greedy is beyond insulting ... i don't know what profession you are in ... but just imagine me coming in and basically calling everyone who works in your field a bunch of greedy hypocrites without even knowing who you guys are or what they do for a living ... again - you can have whatever opinion you want ... but it's formed out of ignorance not only to the sport but to the people you are slamming ... and all it would take is for you to read the case and the affidavits to at least get a better idea of what's going on ...
on that note ... read a bunch of the affidavits last night ... this fucking guy is a real piece of work ... what a piece of scum ... threatening someone's wife, suing ex employees and calling them prostitutes and alcoholics ... this guy is a real asshole ... :evil:
Do you think Armstrong was doping while on Radioshack?
i highly doubt it ...
check that ... after reading some of the documents ... he was ... :shock:
I was going to say something about that yesterday, but I hadn't read much so waited. But yes, I think there is good evidence that he blood doped in 2009 at TDF, and even evidence that he is/was doping in the recent triathlons. Amazing that he is brash enough to continue to do that. The guy is a psychopath I think.
The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way it treats its animals. Ghandi
I was going to say something about that yesterday, but I hadn't read much so waited. But yes, I think there is good evidence that he blood doped in 2009 at TDF, and even evidence that he is/was doping in the recent triathlons. Amazing that he is brash enough to continue to do that. The guy is a psychopath I think.
definitely a psychopath ...
have you read the affidavits!? ... really gives an insight into everyone's mindset at the time ...
also - do you know as part of their sanctions ... these riders - do they lose prize money for the races they were in when they doped? ... i know the garmin guys are under a 6 month suspension now till march 1 and all their results have been cleared during their doping period ...
I was going to say something about that yesterday, but I hadn't read much so waited. But yes, I think there is good evidence that he blood doped in 2009 at TDF, and even evidence that he is/was doping in the recent triathlons. Amazing that he is brash enough to continue to do that. The guy is a psychopath I think.
definitely a psychopath ...
have you read the affidavits!? ... really gives an insight into everyone's mindset at the time ...
also - do you know as part of their sanctions ... these riders - do they lose prize money for the races they were in when they doped? ... i know the garmin guys are under a 6 month suspension now till march 1 and all their results have been cleared during their doping period ...
I have read very little. I have been way too busy at work, stuff at home, and work on a rental apt. above my office. I have read Dave Z's which seems to be the one that affects people the most. A kid whose dad was a substance abuser who got into cycling to avoid the drug scene being pressured into doping. Very sad. I have more respect for Dave Z after this - I have always liked him a lot. I have see an attachment to Frankie A.'s affidavit which is an email from Frankie to Hincapie saying something about the Olympics. Hincapie's response was to chastise and criticize Frankie for not keeping Betsy's mouth in check over her anti-doping talk. Makes me have a lot less respect for Hincapie. I always liked him, but now thinking about how he has stood with Lance for so long until recently (and conveniently so) when he retired. But then again, this case probably incited him to retire now. What gets my goat about the guys that I like(d) that went along with it up until this case, is that they stood by and let Lance bully Landis, Hamilton, Betsy/Frankie, Emma O'Reilly, Bassons, Simeoni, and anyone else that threated Omerta or Lance. In some ways that makes them as bad as the bully IMO, although I do have some empathy for them. I understand the pressure to dope more than the standing idly by while other people were hurt.
The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way it treats its animals. Ghandi
I have read very little. I have been way too busy at work, stuff at home, and work on a rental apt. above my office. I have read Dave Z's which seems to be the one that affects people the most. A kid whose dad was a substance abuser who got into cycling to avoid the drug scene being pressured into doping. Very sad. I have more respect for Dave Z after this - I have always liked him a lot. I have see an attachment to Frankie A.'s affidavit which is an email from Frankie to Hincapie saying something about the Olympics. Hincapie's response was to chastise and criticize Frankie for not keeping Betsy's mouth in check over her anti-doping talk. Makes me have a lot less respect for Hincapie. I always liked him, but now thinking about how he has stood with Lance for so long until recently (and conveniently so) when he retired. But then again, this case probably incited him to retire now. What gets my goat about the guys that I like(d) that went along with it up until this case, is that they stood by and let Lance bully Landis, Hamilton, Betsy/Frankie, Emma O'Reilly, Bassons, Simeoni, and anyone else that threated Omerta or Lance. In some ways that makes them as bad as the bully IMO, although I do have some empathy for them. I understand the pressure to dope more than the standing idly by while other people were hurt.
here is a link to the USADA report but broken out by sections so its easier to read one person's affidavit ...
but yeah - hincapie is revered and really based on the affidavits i've read so far ... he's just another guy who is protecting his psychopath asshole friend ...
but yeah - hincapie is revered and really based on the affidavits i've read so far ... he's just another guy who is protecting his psychopath asshole friend ...
Thanks for posting the link. I read Vande Velde, Leipheimer's, and Danielson's. That's intense stuff, but refreshing in a way to see the ownership. It'd be nice to hear some euro's do the same. The internal struggle comes through more with Danielson and Vande Velde. It makes me wonder what's going on in Lance's head at the moment. As much of an a-hole as he is, there has to be some envy that these guys get to come clean. What do you think Lance's reasons are to not come clean? He already is loaded, whether or not his titles get stripped is out of his hands. Is it all ego for him at this point? Is he trying to hold on to the whole cancer survivor/inspiration to many/ Livestrong thing? It seems like his most ardent supporters at this point would say, 'okay, he doped, but he also inspired'.
All of this purging and ownership is what a lot of cycling fans have wanted for a long time. Now that we get it, it'll take some time to digest. Past suspicions are now brought to the surface. In a way, it makes me more excited for next season.
Thanks for posting the link. I read Vande Velde, Leipheimer's, and Danielson's. That's intense stuff, but refreshing in a way to see the ownership. It'd be nice to hear some euro's do the same. The internal struggle comes through more with Danielson and Vande Velde. It makes me wonder what's going on in Lance's head at the moment. As much of an a-hole as he is, there has to be some envy that these guys get to come clean. What do you think Lance's reasons are to not come clean? He already is loaded, whether or not his titles get stripped is out of his hands. Is it all ego for him at this point? Is he trying to hold on to the whole cancer survivor/inspiration to many/ Livestrong thing? It seems like his most ardent supporters at this point would say, 'okay, he doped, but he also inspired'.
All of this purging and ownership is what a lot of cycling fans have wanted for a long time. Now that we get it, it'll take some time to digest. Past suspicions are now brought to the surface. In a way, it makes me more excited for next season.
as riverrunner said ... he is likely a psychopath ... and it's like tyler hamilton said - you lie so much ... after a while you start believing your own lies ...
i think his unwillingness to come clean now is based partly on his nature and partly because he stands to lose a ton of money which I wouldn't be surprised if he will anyways ... i hear his lawsuit with SCA promotions might be revisited ...
after reading more of the report ... i think i've changed my mind about lance's ability ... i have always believed that if everyone was on a level playing field - lance would still be the best ... but based on the evidence -i'm not too sure anymore ... dude basically used tax dollars to have the best doctors, drugs and program money could buy ...
what kills me is he still has corporate sponsors too ... not sure what readioshack and nissan are doing ... even tho he doesn't ride for them he's still linked and with the johan and the "trainers" managing that team ... it's bad all over ...
i dont know what to believe. I like most people got caught up in the lance love during the 7 tour wins. I still dont know how he can be stripped of his wins by the USADA for a sporting contest run in a different country. I would assume USADA has no jurisdiction in the matter. Second, I assume Lance isnt going to go to trial, and I dont know how you try a person who isnt even going to appear or fight it. Its one thing for him to stand trial, be found guilty, then be stripped of his wins. What seems to be going on currently, is this trial essentially in the media, thats obviously one sided. How can you be found guilty and stripped of wins when you are essentially NOT being tried at all?
I also wonder, if he is guilty, why its only been teammates who have come out and said he did it. Alot more people other than teammates would have been involved. I assume he also told his girlfriend and or wife at the time, or she knew. Sheryl crow maybe? Who is the wife of his first couple children?
I wonder why if he is guilty, his doctors, girlfriends, wives, major higher ups in cycling, all have been silent on the issue? What essentially is being argued is that the entire cycling world knew lance was doping, covered it up, looked the other way, and so far only his teammates have come out and said he doped. No one else.
i dont know what to believe. I like most people got caught up in the lance love during the 7 tour wins. I still dont know how he can be stripped of his wins by the USADA for a sporting contest run in a different country. I would assume USADA has no jurisdiction in the matter. Second, I assume Lance isnt going to go to trial, and I dont know how you try a person who isnt even going to appear or fight it. Its one thing for him to stand trial, be found guilty, then be stripped of his wins. What seems to be going on currently, is this trial essentially in the media, thats obviously one sided. How can you be found guilty and stripped of wins when you are essentially NOT being tried at all?
I also wonder, if he is guilty, why its only been teammates who have come out and said he did it. Alot more people other than teammates would have been involved. I assume he also told his girlfriend and or wife at the time, or she knew. Sheryl crow maybe? Who is the wife of his first couple children?
I wonder why if he is guilty, his doctors, girlfriends, wives, major higher ups in cycling, all have been silent on the issue? What essentially is being argued is that the entire cycling world knew lance was doping, covered it up, looked the other way, and so far only his teammates have come out and said he doped. No one else.
You have to look at what the payoff would be for the person, outside of a former teammate, to accuse Lance of doping. Becky Andreau (wife of former teammate) did, and she really took a beating. Maybe more people outside of teammates will step up, since it's starting to snowball now, but there will be a backlash towards those people regardless. They have to weigh out if it's worth it.
I assume Lance isnt going to go to trial, and I dont know how you try a person who isnt even going to appear or fight it. Its one thing for him to stand trial, be found guilty, then be stripped of his wins. What seems to be going on currently, is this trial essentially in the media, thats obviously one sided. How can you be found guilty and stripped of wins when you are essentially NOT being tried at all?
dude....we've been thru this....by CHOOSING not to fight, he is at their mercy. lance can spin it any way he wants but he CHOSE not to fight because he knows he's guilty and can't win.
If I had known then what I know now...
Vegas 93, Vegas 98, Vegas 00 (10 year show), Vegas 03, Vegas 06
VIC 07
EV LA1 08
Seattle1 09, Seattle2 09, Salt Lake 09, LA4 09
Columbus 10
EV LA 11
Vancouver 11
Missoula 12
Portland 13, Spokane 13
St. Paul 14, Denver 14
I assume Lance isnt going to go to trial, and I dont know how you try a person who isnt even going to appear or fight it. Its one thing for him to stand trial, be found guilty, then be stripped of his wins. What seems to be going on currently, is this trial essentially in the media, thats obviously one sided. How can you be found guilty and stripped of wins when you are essentially NOT being tried at all?
dude....we've been thru this....by CHOOSING not to fight, he is at their mercy. lance can spin it any way he wants but he CHOSE not to fight because he knows he's guilty and can't win.
unless you talked to lance personally I dont know how you could possibly know if he's innocent or guilty. I do know justice, as its supposed to happen in America, is that you stand trial, you are found guilty or innocent and face whatever decision is made. Lance hasnt been tried, and the USADA has no jurisdiction. He deserves, guilty or not, to be in court, and tell his side of the story. Thats what should happen. He doesnt want to stand trial though, maybe because he's guilty, but conversely maybe because he is accurate and he's the victim of a witchhunt. who knows.
The prosecutions case is 13 or 14 teammates who say he doped. For me, id want more compelling evidence than that, which could easily be explained away as hearsay and rumors. If you are going to strip a guy of 7 wins, and ruin his reputation, i think you need more evidence.
The stripping of his wins cant occur by the USADA because it would set a bizaare precedent, where anytime the US has problems with an athlete they can negate and erase their wins EVEN IF those wins occur on foreign soil. Thats a slippery slope...
Choosing not to fight isnt an admission of guilt no matter how you want to spin it. Its just choosing not to fight. Lance could have a zillion reasons to stop fighting, none we will ever hear and all could be valid and acceptable reasons.
Even if he's innocent, he'll face people saying he doped until the day he dies. No matter what, he's forever marked. In the face of that, this idea that he'll never be able to convince people makes complete sense he'd stop fighting it.
Its like I said earlier in the summer. I was arguing with relatives about steroid use in baseball. And they brought up names of people they said were caught with steroids, and those athletes they named never were caught. And thats a shame for all the many athletes in all sports who never doped but will forever be under this cloud of suspicion, merely because they entered the league and played with and against athletes who doped. thats sad
it's a ton of shit to read and review, but I'm sure you'd change your mind if you did.
If I had known then what I know now...
Vegas 93, Vegas 98, Vegas 00 (10 year show), Vegas 03, Vegas 06
VIC 07
EV LA1 08
Seattle1 09, Seattle2 09, Salt Lake 09, LA4 09
Columbus 10
EV LA 11
Vancouver 11
Missoula 12
Portland 13, Spokane 13
St. Paul 14, Denver 14
unless you talked to lance personally I dont know how you could possibly know if he's innocent or guilty. I do know justice, as its supposed to happen in America, is that you stand trial, you are found guilty or innocent and face whatever decision is made. Lance hasnt been tried, and the USADA has no jurisdiction. He deserves, guilty or not, to be in court, and tell his side of the story. Thats what should happen. He doesnt want to stand trial though, maybe because he's guilty, but conversely maybe because he is accurate and he's the victim of a witchhunt. who knows.
The prosecutions case is 13 or 14 teammates who say he doped. For me, id want more compelling evidence than that, which could easily be explained away as hearsay and rumors. If you are going to strip a guy of 7 wins, and ruin his reputation, i think you need more evidence.
good grief ... :fp:
it's no wonder why corporations rule america and OJ can walk free ... i find it absolutely incredulous what people are willing to rationalize to avoid the truth ...
lance armstrong is a fraud and an asshole ... how anyone could defend this scum is not interested in looking at the facts ...
Crazy.... because he hasn't been tried he's innocent. Lance refused a trial. His choice. That's the same as a guilty plea, except worse. In a criminal guilty plea there is so much to lose - like your freedom. And most defendants don't have money for a private attorney. They are stuck with an over worked and under paid public defender. Lance had money and since it was not a criminal case he would not be sent to jail. Instead he refused the trial BECAUSE THE EVIDENCE IS OVERWHELMING!
This is the one of the best short summaries about Lance:
Crazy.... because he hasn't been tried he's innocent. Lance refused a trial. His choice. That's the same as a guilty plea, except worse. In a criminal guilty plea there is so much to lose - like your freedom. And most defendants don't have money for a private attorney. They are stuck with an over worked and under paid public defender. Lance had money and since it was not a criminal case he would not be sent to jail. Instead he refused the trial BECAUSE THE EVIDENCE IS OVERWHELMING!
This is the one of the best short summaries about Lance:
anyone who pretends to know the truth about this issue, unless they know lance personally is espousing an opinion. thats the fact of the matter.
As far as guilty pleas, the criminal justice system is filled with stacks of cases where someone confessed to a crime and later it came out the person was lying, was confused, or was coerced into the plea. That happens more in "crime" trials, more than this case where its more about other issues.
The wm3 confessed using the alford plea but maintain their innocence, are free, and no evidence linking them to the crime exists. But still over a year after their release, you can bet many people, including people ON THIS BOARD feel the wm3 are guilty. How is that possible? Until the day they die, many in WM including the Judge Burnett and the WM law enforcement will maintain the wm3 are guilty.
No matter if lance lives a saintly life the rest of his life, there will always be people who say he doped. I talked about before, how in baseball EVERYONE who played during the steroid age is now tainted. Many people falsely believe clean players were caught using. Someone like Jeter, the guys never been caught with anything, yet wasnt it just a few months ago someone was saying he used.
Look at the case of Mumia or Peltier, both have excellent reason to believe the government and everyone involved is out to get them. I used to know someone who met FBI agents who actually said they knew Peltier was innocent but were intent on keeping him locked up.
If lance is innocent, he could spend the next 20 years fighting in court about all this. He's spent millions of dollars and years of his life in courts fighting it so far. There will always be people who say he doped. If he's innocent, i think he realized the fight wasnt worth it. There is no way for him to win, if he's innocent.
And lets be clear, if he's guilty, he should be punished, but conversely if he's innocent, those who actively worked to "get" him should also be punished.
anyone who pretends to know the truth about this issue, unless they know lance personally is espousing an opinion. thats the fact of the matter.
This is the flaw in your response, because all the people in the USADA report did know Lance personally. Some spent significant time with him socially, and some so loyal they probably would've taken a bullet for him. But, I understand that you want factual proof.
I'm guessing Lance's future has two options: He owns up to doping, or he continues to deny it, becoming a bigger tool than he already is, it eats him up inside, and he becomes more isolated, locked away in his house urinating in jars.
anyone who pretends to know the truth about this issue, unless they know lance personally is espousing an opinion. thats the fact of the matter.
As far as guilty pleas, the criminal justice system is filled with stacks of cases where someone confessed to a crime and later it came out the person was lying, was confused, or was coerced into the plea. That happens more in "crime" trials, more than this case where its more about other issues.
The wm3 confessed using the alford plea but maintain their innocence, are free, and no evidence linking them to the crime exists. But still over a year after their release, you can bet many people, including people ON THIS BOARD feel the wm3 are guilty. How is that possible? Until the day they die, many in WM including the Judge Burnett and the WM law enforcement will maintain the wm3 are guilty.
No matter if lance lives a saintly life the rest of his life, there will always be people who say he doped. I talked about before, how in baseball EVERYONE who played during the steroid age is now tainted. Many people falsely believe clean players were caught using. Someone like Jeter, the guys never been caught with anything, yet wasnt it just a few months ago someone was saying he used.
Look at the case of Mumia or Peltier, both have excellent reason to believe the government and everyone involved is out to get them. I used to know someone who met FBI agents who actually said they knew Peltier was innocent but were intent on keeping him locked up.
If lance is innocent, he could spend the next 20 years fighting in court about all this. He's spent millions of dollars and years of his life in courts fighting it so far. There will always be people who say he doped. If he's innocent, i think he realized the fight wasnt worth it. There is no way for him to win, if he's innocent.
And lets be clear, if he's guilty, he should be punished, but conversely if he's innocent, those who actively worked to "get" him should also be punished.
i am guessing you a) haven't read the evidence and b) do not understand cycling at all and c) you have bought into the myth that is Lance Armstrong ... there could be no other reason to exhibit so much blind support for this guy ...
this isn't a matter of what was Lance thinking ... there are so many witnesses ... even his BFF implicated him ... all these cyclists would face perjury charges if they lied ... the walls are crumbling down ... more and more people involved are coming forward ... and then you read comments like this and it shows how easy people are manipulated with PR campaigns and dollars ...
your assessment is devoid of any critical thinking nor objectivity ...
The canonisation of Lance Armstrong will commence on Thursday, when he will be lauded for "15 years, of serving and empowering" 2.5 million cancer survivors. The following day Hollywood will pay its respects, in the form of a gala featuring Sean Penn, Ben Stiller and Robin Williams.
On Saturday, more than 100,000 American Football fans, and millions of TV viewers on ABC, will laud the cyclist, and his eponymous foundation, at the start of the second quarter of the College game between Baylor and the University of Texas. The entire student section, which seats 17,000, will simultaneously don specially designed Nike shirts, promoting Armstrong's Livestrong brand.
On Sunday 4,000 cyclists will pay $50 to participate in a challenge event in Armstrong's home town of Austin, Texas. His foundation's sponsors will underwrite performances by local drama groups, musical acts, and sporting activities ranging from tennis to yoga.
Livestrong speaks of "taking control of the global conversation" in relation to cancer. A similar strategy is being employed, as Armstrong seeks to counter his depiction as an amoral, manipulative bully in the most damning report into a prominent athlete in the modern era.
Armstrong's status, in his constituency of the United States, is largely unchallenged, although by yesterday morning his official Twitter feed was finally infiltrated by critics, who made obscene comparisons between him and fraudster Bernie Madoff.
Donald Trump, whose populist instincts are impeccable, spoke for the vast majority of his countrymen by branding the United States Anti-Doping Agency (Usada) report "brutal". He observed: "I guess they have Lance Armstrong cold. A waste of taxpayer money to take down an American hero."
Sponsors are circling the wagons. Nike, who pay Livestrong a minimum $7.5 million a year from its merchandise profits, are particularly exposed. Their marketing strategy promotes the myth of Armstrong as a warrior king, plucked from an oncology ward. Promotional videos feature him on his bike, against intermittent images of cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy, confronting mortality and conquering fear.
Armstrong's principal product is himself as a symbol of hope. That is a force sufficiently pure and powerful to lure such celebrated acolytes as former president George W Bush and Bono, the ultimate good cause junkie.
To reinforce the point, the front page of Armstrong's website carries a freshly-posted paean of praise from Sarah O'Leary, who is described as a "marketing expert, public speaker, licensed minister and issues-focused independent".
She writes: "The gun that should be smoking isn't, and wouldn't have any real effect on the brand Livestrong if it were. Lance stopped being a mere professional cyclist while he was still on his bike, and the accusations against him have had their 15 minutes of fame. Unlike mere mortal performers, Lance lives in rarefied air that only a scant few professional athletes reach. He is substantially bigger than his sport."
That hoary old cliché misses the point. Armstrong behaved, and continues to behave, as if he is the sport which enriched him. Cycling around the world is being hit by a tsunami of guilt and retribution as a result of his exposure as a man with the morals of a gang boss.
In Australia last night, Matthew White, a former team-mate of Armstrong, admitted to doping and stood down from key roles in both professional cycling and the Australian Olympic squad.
His status, as a leading proponent of so-called clean teams made his downfall doubly significant and served to underline the ambivalence of the debate about appropriate punishments for a doomed generation of chemically-driven athletes.
The previous evening, Johan Bruyneel, Armstrong's former team manager, was forced out of the Luxemburg-based Radioshack team. The Belgian Cycling Federation alerted their prosecutor and did little to dampen speculation they will recommend a lifetime ban.
Should that occur, few tears will be shed for a man accused of being pivotal figure in what Usada described as "the most sophisticated, professionalised and successful doping programme that sport has ever seen".
In Italy, recently-retired cyclist Leonardo Bertagnolli was summoned to a hearing involving the Italian Olympic Committee's anti-doping prosecutor after revealing details of drug use supervised by the infamous Michele Ferrari, Armstrong's former doctor.
In Chicago, Christian Vande Velde, another member of Armstrong's tainted team, was dealing with his mother's shame after revealing his guilt to her. He admits he has yet to summon the courage to explain himself to his father John, a former Olympic track cyclist.
In Beijing, Matthew Dowsett, a British rider for Team Sky, recanted his belief in Armstrong as a "legend" in what bore all the hallmarks of a humiliating piece of PR-inspired penitence. Also in China, Pat McQuaid, the president of the UCI, cycling's global governing body, was under pressure, together with "honorary president" Hein Verbruggen, the IOC member whose denial that he said Armstrong "never, never, never" doped was torpedoed by the publishing, in Holland, of the transcript of his original interview.
His claims that the UCI "could have done nothing and did not hide anything" in an era of sophisticated doping merely confirmed the wisdom of David Millar's conviction that he has no part to play in a rehabilitated, recalibrated sport.
McQuaid's abject leadership skills were highlighted on Friday by his resistance to calls for cycling to set up a "truth and reconciliation" process. He suggested something similar at the London Olympics, retracted the idea at last month's World Championships, and now says an amnesty for the cheats is against the World Anti-Doping Agency code.
The enormity of the fraud needs to be exposed, and acknowledged, by its perpetrators, as the first stage in a process of renewal. Anecdotal evidence suggests the code of omerta, which allowed Armstrong to spread his poison, is being sustained by the fear that anyone re-opening Pandora's box would suffer reprisals.
The manifest failings of the UCI must be addressed. In return, athletes must accept that suspicion will be the neutral observer's default position until change is tangible.
As for Armstrong, he is in a netherworld of victimhood, and false heroism. The threat of legal action is potent, but his exposure as a common cheat carries little personal penalty, because he is conditioned to living a lie.
The real victims are those cancer sufferers, who invested in the mirage of his magnificence. Perhaps, instead of concentrating on the Livestrong celebrations, they should listen to the authentic voice of Lance Armstrong, as expressed the Usada report: "I can destroy you… We are going to fucking tear you apart… I am going to make your life a living fucking hell."
Saint Lance? Draw your own conclusions.
10 key questions over the Lance Armstrong affair
Can governing bodies be trusted to be self-policing?
The evidence suggests not. Governing bodies are conservative and self-protective of their sport. Usada's persistence in pursuing Armstrong suggests independent scrutiny of fundamental moral and financial issues is overdue. Usada's Armstrong file is in the hands of UCI lawyers, said UCI president Pat McQuaid on Friday.
Have Bradley Wiggins, and Team Sky, been compromised?
Undoubtedly. While the integrity of Wiggins and Dave Brailsford, director of the Tour de France-winning team, is unchallengeable, Sky's "zero tolerance" stance on drugs is open to question. Directeur Sportif Sean Yates, a close associate of Armstrong, says he knew nothing about the drug cheat's activities. How could he have understood so little?
Will the US attorney's investigation be renewed?
Federal prosecutors are under pressure to revive the process, terminated in February. A separate inquiry is being pursued by the Department of Justice. This was prompted by a lawsuit, filed by former team-mate Floyd Landis, which alleged Armstrong used public money to fund a doping programme.
Will Armstrong be stripped of his Olympic medal?
Yes, if the IOC value consistency and credibility. They have already stripped Tyler Hamilton, Armstrong's former team-mate, of the gold medal won in 2004. No, if they choose strictly to observe the eight-year statute of limitations, stipulated in the world anti-doping code. Armstrong won his bronze in 2000.
What are the precedents for prosecuting an athlete for perjury?
Marion Jones's fall from grace, after winning five medals in Sydney, was completed when she admitted lying to a jury about her use of drugs. She was convicted of perjury, and sentenced to six months in prison in 2008.
Are the UCI still taking legal action against Paul Kimmage?
The defamation case, brought against the former cyclist, turned campaigning journalist, is still due to be heard in the Swiss district court on 12 December. Donations to Kimmage's defence fund, which are more than £37,000, can be made through www.nyvelocity.com.
Will new winners of the seven tainted Tours de France be announced?
No, according to director Christian Prudhomme, whose plans to promote the centenary edition of the Tour, beyond its European heartland, are in tatters. He had little option – 20 of the 21 podium places between 1999 and 2005 were filled by riders associated with doping.
What are the implications for other sports?
Possibly profound. Italian football endured an EPO scandal in the late Nineties. Eufemiano Fuentes, the Spanish doctor exposed in cycling's Operacion Puerto, claims he also doped footballers and tennis players. Luis Garcia del Moral, banned for life for links to Armstrong, insists he was "medical advisor" to Barcelona and Valencia.
Will cycling's status as a boom sport be affected?
Probably not. The timing of the announcement of British cycling's success, in attracting a million new participants, was unfortunate, but drug controversies can be detached, at grassroots level, from the benefits of a healthy outdoor activity.
What about the Armstrong apologists?
They must live with their consciences. The most poignant case involves British TV commentator Phil Liggett. Many feel he compromised himself earlier this year with a bizarre pro-Armstrong, anti-Usada rant on South African radio, which quickly went viral.
If he wasn't juicing there is no way he could have kept up with a sport full of people who were. If you have ever taken an over the counter pre-workout drink - then you know how amazing the boost is you get from it. Imagine if everyone else is taking the most amazing (illegal) pre-workout drinks money can buy --- do you really think you could beat all of them naturally. Hell no.
I still think he won fair and square, but he was totally juiced.
If he wasn't juicing there is no way he could have kept up with a sport full of people who were. If you have ever taken an over the counter pre-workout drink - then you know how amazing the boost is you get from it. Imagine if everyone else is taking the most amazing (illegal) pre-workout drinks money can buy --- do you really think you could beat all of them naturally. Hell no.
I still think he won fair and square, but he was totally juiced.
I'd say you haven't read the report. Or a summary of the report.
The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way it treats its animals. Ghandi
Comments
The same could be said for everyone involved with cycling during the Armstrong years...the only reason anyones coming forward now is $$$$ they hope to gain from book deals or a movie.
The USADA was open for business in 2001 they could have investigated him then...surely they heard the accusations!!! The whole sport is full of HYPOCRITES!! or did he bully the USADA as well. I was bullied thats why I didn't speak up ... more like Lance reminded them that he was making everyone a lot of $$$$ ... then when they all got busted or are out of the sport ...lets write a tell all book .... $$$$, all everyone sees is $$$$ signs.
"Life Is What Happens To You When Your Busy Making Other Plans" John Lennon
no one made more money off cycling than lance armstrong
listen ... it's absurd having this conversation because your opinion (which you have every right to) is simply not based on any reality ... all the cyclists have said that they have come forward in the interests of the sport ... you don't want to believe that - that's fine ... but you are making outrageous assumptions based on absolutely zero understanding of the cyclists you are accusing and the sport itself ... you are essentially insulting the integrity of everyone of these people who are about to face sanctions for breaking the code of silence in order to defend basically a douchebag ...
so ... feel free to label these guys as greedy and continue to defend a fraud ... your choice but i'd only wish you knew what you were talking about ...
actually I don't really think I'm defending anybody by my comments today ... I have defended him in the past ... what I'm not defending is the people involved with cycling who made a ton of $$$ off Armstrong and could stand to make more ... HYPOCRITES. The funny thing of this whole deal is that Armstrong will probably write a book that will outsell all their books combined. They were doping as well...so what does that say about them? If some of them were never caught I doubt they'd have come forward. That whole sport been a joke for quite sometime.
"Life Is What Happens To You When Your Busy Making Other Plans" John Lennon
again ... read the affidavits ... you know not what you are talking about ... you calling these cyclists who have lost all their results from the past and are about to face a ban hypocrites and greedy is beyond insulting ... i don't know what profession you are in ... but just imagine me coming in and basically calling everyone who works in your field a bunch of greedy hypocrites without even knowing who you guys are or what they do for a living ... again - you can have whatever opinion you want ... but it's formed out of ignorance not only to the sport but to the people you are slamming ... and all it would take is for you to read the case and the affidavits to at least get a better idea of what's going on ...
check that ... after reading some of the documents ... he was ... :shock:
I was going to say something about that yesterday, but I hadn't read much so waited. But yes, I think there is good evidence that he blood doped in 2009 at TDF, and even evidence that he is/was doping in the recent triathlons. Amazing that he is brash enough to continue to do that. The guy is a psychopath I think.
definitely a psychopath ...
have you read the affidavits!? ... really gives an insight into everyone's mindset at the time ...
also - do you know as part of their sanctions ... these riders - do they lose prize money for the races they were in when they doped? ... i know the garmin guys are under a 6 month suspension now till march 1 and all their results have been cleared during their doping period ...
I have read very little. I have been way too busy at work, stuff at home, and work on a rental apt. above my office. I have read Dave Z's which seems to be the one that affects people the most. A kid whose dad was a substance abuser who got into cycling to avoid the drug scene being pressured into doping. Very sad. I have more respect for Dave Z after this - I have always liked him a lot. I have see an attachment to Frankie A.'s affidavit which is an email from Frankie to Hincapie saying something about the Olympics. Hincapie's response was to chastise and criticize Frankie for not keeping Betsy's mouth in check over her anti-doping talk. Makes me have a lot less respect for Hincapie. I always liked him, but now thinking about how he has stood with Lance for so long until recently (and conveniently so) when he retired. But then again, this case probably incited him to retire now. What gets my goat about the guys that I like(d) that went along with it up until this case, is that they stood by and let Lance bully Landis, Hamilton, Betsy/Frankie, Emma O'Reilly, Bassons, Simeoni, and anyone else that threated Omerta or Lance. In some ways that makes them as bad as the bully IMO, although I do have some empathy for them. I understand the pressure to dope more than the standing idly by while other people were hurt.
here is a link to the USADA report but broken out by sections so its easier to read one person's affidavit ...
http://cyclinginvestigation.usada.org/
but yeah - hincapie is revered and really based on the affidavits i've read so far ... he's just another guy who is protecting his psychopath asshole friend ...
Thanks for posting the link. I read Vande Velde, Leipheimer's, and Danielson's. That's intense stuff, but refreshing in a way to see the ownership. It'd be nice to hear some euro's do the same. The internal struggle comes through more with Danielson and Vande Velde. It makes me wonder what's going on in Lance's head at the moment. As much of an a-hole as he is, there has to be some envy that these guys get to come clean. What do you think Lance's reasons are to not come clean? He already is loaded, whether or not his titles get stripped is out of his hands. Is it all ego for him at this point? Is he trying to hold on to the whole cancer survivor/inspiration to many/ Livestrong thing? It seems like his most ardent supporters at this point would say, 'okay, he doped, but he also inspired'.
All of this purging and ownership is what a lot of cycling fans have wanted for a long time. Now that we get it, it'll take some time to digest. Past suspicions are now brought to the surface. In a way, it makes me more excited for next season.
as riverrunner said ... he is likely a psychopath ... and it's like tyler hamilton said - you lie so much ... after a while you start believing your own lies ...
i think his unwillingness to come clean now is based partly on his nature and partly because he stands to lose a ton of money which I wouldn't be surprised if he will anyways ... i hear his lawsuit with SCA promotions might be revisited ...
after reading more of the report ... i think i've changed my mind about lance's ability ... i have always believed that if everyone was on a level playing field - lance would still be the best ... but based on the evidence -i'm not too sure anymore ... dude basically used tax dollars to have the best doctors, drugs and program money could buy ...
what kills me is he still has corporate sponsors too ... not sure what readioshack and nissan are doing ... even tho he doesn't ride for them he's still linked and with the johan and the "trainers" managing that team ... it's bad all over ...
Can Lance please fall off the fucking planet.
And take Oprah with him...
Till there aint nothing left worth taking away from me.....
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/report- ... cked-today
hopefully, the walls are gonna crumble on down ...
they may just wipe out those years in the tdf ... which I would agree is the right thing to do ...
http://velonews.competitor.com/2012/10/ ... ted_260748
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ZmJtYaU ... ata_player
I also wonder, if he is guilty, why its only been teammates who have come out and said he did it. Alot more people other than teammates would have been involved. I assume he also told his girlfriend and or wife at the time, or she knew. Sheryl crow maybe? Who is the wife of his first couple children?
I wonder why if he is guilty, his doctors, girlfriends, wives, major higher ups in cycling, all have been silent on the issue? What essentially is being argued is that the entire cycling world knew lance was doping, covered it up, looked the other way, and so far only his teammates have come out and said he doped. No one else.
You have to look at what the payoff would be for the person, outside of a former teammate, to accuse Lance of doping. Becky Andreau (wife of former teammate) did, and she really took a beating. Maybe more people outside of teammates will step up, since it's starting to snowball now, but there will be a backlash towards those people regardless. They have to weigh out if it's worth it.
then its an even playing field
dude....we've been thru this....by CHOOSING not to fight, he is at their mercy. lance can spin it any way he wants but he CHOSE not to fight because he knows he's guilty and can't win.
Vegas 93, Vegas 98, Vegas 00 (10 year show), Vegas 03, Vegas 06
VIC 07
EV LA1 08
Seattle1 09, Seattle2 09, Salt Lake 09, LA4 09
Columbus 10
EV LA 11
Vancouver 11
Missoula 12
Portland 13, Spokane 13
St. Paul 14, Denver 14
unless you talked to lance personally I dont know how you could possibly know if he's innocent or guilty. I do know justice, as its supposed to happen in America, is that you stand trial, you are found guilty or innocent and face whatever decision is made. Lance hasnt been tried, and the USADA has no jurisdiction. He deserves, guilty or not, to be in court, and tell his side of the story. Thats what should happen. He doesnt want to stand trial though, maybe because he's guilty, but conversely maybe because he is accurate and he's the victim of a witchhunt. who knows.
The prosecutions case is 13 or 14 teammates who say he doped. For me, id want more compelling evidence than that, which could easily be explained away as hearsay and rumors. If you are going to strip a guy of 7 wins, and ruin his reputation, i think you need more evidence.
The stripping of his wins cant occur by the USADA because it would set a bizaare precedent, where anytime the US has problems with an athlete they can negate and erase their wins EVEN IF those wins occur on foreign soil. Thats a slippery slope...
Choosing not to fight isnt an admission of guilt no matter how you want to spin it. Its just choosing not to fight. Lance could have a zillion reasons to stop fighting, none we will ever hear and all could be valid and acceptable reasons.
Even if he's innocent, he'll face people saying he doped until the day he dies. No matter what, he's forever marked. In the face of that, this idea that he'll never be able to convince people makes complete sense he'd stop fighting it.
Its like I said earlier in the summer. I was arguing with relatives about steroid use in baseball. And they brought up names of people they said were caught with steroids, and those athletes they named never were caught. And thats a shame for all the many athletes in all sports who never doped but will forever be under this cloud of suspicion, merely because they entered the league and played with and against athletes who doped. thats sad
it's a ton of shit to read and review, but I'm sure you'd change your mind if you did.
Vegas 93, Vegas 98, Vegas 00 (10 year show), Vegas 03, Vegas 06
VIC 07
EV LA1 08
Seattle1 09, Seattle2 09, Salt Lake 09, LA4 09
Columbus 10
EV LA 11
Vancouver 11
Missoula 12
Portland 13, Spokane 13
St. Paul 14, Denver 14
good grief ... :fp:
it's no wonder why corporations rule america and OJ can walk free ... i find it absolutely incredulous what people are willing to rationalize to avoid the truth ...
lance armstrong is a fraud and an asshole ... how anyone could defend this scum is not interested in looking at the facts ...
This is the one of the best short summaries about Lance:
http://chicago.cbslocal.com/2012/10/14/ ... s-a-witch/
anyone who pretends to know the truth about this issue, unless they know lance personally is espousing an opinion. thats the fact of the matter.
As far as guilty pleas, the criminal justice system is filled with stacks of cases where someone confessed to a crime and later it came out the person was lying, was confused, or was coerced into the plea. That happens more in "crime" trials, more than this case where its more about other issues.
The wm3 confessed using the alford plea but maintain their innocence, are free, and no evidence linking them to the crime exists. But still over a year after their release, you can bet many people, including people ON THIS BOARD feel the wm3 are guilty. How is that possible? Until the day they die, many in WM including the Judge Burnett and the WM law enforcement will maintain the wm3 are guilty.
No matter if lance lives a saintly life the rest of his life, there will always be people who say he doped. I talked about before, how in baseball EVERYONE who played during the steroid age is now tainted. Many people falsely believe clean players were caught using. Someone like Jeter, the guys never been caught with anything, yet wasnt it just a few months ago someone was saying he used.
Look at the case of Mumia or Peltier, both have excellent reason to believe the government and everyone involved is out to get them. I used to know someone who met FBI agents who actually said they knew Peltier was innocent but were intent on keeping him locked up.
If lance is innocent, he could spend the next 20 years fighting in court about all this. He's spent millions of dollars and years of his life in courts fighting it so far. There will always be people who say he doped. If he's innocent, i think he realized the fight wasnt worth it. There is no way for him to win, if he's innocent.
And lets be clear, if he's guilty, he should be punished, but conversely if he's innocent, those who actively worked to "get" him should also be punished.
This is the flaw in your response, because all the people in the USADA report did know Lance personally. Some spent significant time with him socially, and some so loyal they probably would've taken a bullet for him. But, I understand that you want factual proof.
I'm guessing Lance's future has two options: He owns up to doping, or he continues to deny it, becoming a bigger tool than he already is, it eats him up inside, and he becomes more isolated, locked away in his house urinating in jars.
i am guessing you a) haven't read the evidence and b) do not understand cycling at all and c) you have bought into the myth that is Lance Armstrong ... there could be no other reason to exhibit so much blind support for this guy ...
this isn't a matter of what was Lance thinking ... there are so many witnesses ... even his BFF implicated him ... all these cyclists would face perjury charges if they lied ... the walls are crumbling down ... more and more people involved are coming forward ... and then you read comments like this and it shows how easy people are manipulated with PR campaigns and dollars ...
your assessment is devoid of any critical thinking nor objectivity ...
http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/gene ... 10381.html
The canonisation of Lance Armstrong will commence on Thursday, when he will be lauded for "15 years, of serving and empowering" 2.5 million cancer survivors. The following day Hollywood will pay its respects, in the form of a gala featuring Sean Penn, Ben Stiller and Robin Williams.
On Saturday, more than 100,000 American Football fans, and millions of TV viewers on ABC, will laud the cyclist, and his eponymous foundation, at the start of the second quarter of the College game between Baylor and the University of Texas. The entire student section, which seats 17,000, will simultaneously don specially designed Nike shirts, promoting Armstrong's Livestrong brand.
On Sunday 4,000 cyclists will pay $50 to participate in a challenge event in Armstrong's home town of Austin, Texas. His foundation's sponsors will underwrite performances by local drama groups, musical acts, and sporting activities ranging from tennis to yoga.
Livestrong speaks of "taking control of the global conversation" in relation to cancer. A similar strategy is being employed, as Armstrong seeks to counter his depiction as an amoral, manipulative bully in the most damning report into a prominent athlete in the modern era.
Armstrong's status, in his constituency of the United States, is largely unchallenged, although by yesterday morning his official Twitter feed was finally infiltrated by critics, who made obscene comparisons between him and fraudster Bernie Madoff.
Donald Trump, whose populist instincts are impeccable, spoke for the vast majority of his countrymen by branding the United States Anti-Doping Agency (Usada) report "brutal". He observed: "I guess they have Lance Armstrong cold. A waste of taxpayer money to take down an American hero."
Sponsors are circling the wagons. Nike, who pay Livestrong a minimum $7.5 million a year from its merchandise profits, are particularly exposed. Their marketing strategy promotes the myth of Armstrong as a warrior king, plucked from an oncology ward. Promotional videos feature him on his bike, against intermittent images of cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy, confronting mortality and conquering fear.
Armstrong's principal product is himself as a symbol of hope. That is a force sufficiently pure and powerful to lure such celebrated acolytes as former president George W Bush and Bono, the ultimate good cause junkie.
To reinforce the point, the front page of Armstrong's website carries a freshly-posted paean of praise from Sarah O'Leary, who is described as a "marketing expert, public speaker, licensed minister and issues-focused independent".
She writes: "The gun that should be smoking isn't, and wouldn't have any real effect on the brand Livestrong if it were. Lance stopped being a mere professional cyclist while he was still on his bike, and the accusations against him have had their 15 minutes of fame. Unlike mere mortal performers, Lance lives in rarefied air that only a scant few professional athletes reach. He is substantially bigger than his sport."
That hoary old cliché misses the point. Armstrong behaved, and continues to behave, as if he is the sport which enriched him. Cycling around the world is being hit by a tsunami of guilt and retribution as a result of his exposure as a man with the morals of a gang boss.
In Australia last night, Matthew White, a former team-mate of Armstrong, admitted to doping and stood down from key roles in both professional cycling and the Australian Olympic squad.
His status, as a leading proponent of so-called clean teams made his downfall doubly significant and served to underline the ambivalence of the debate about appropriate punishments for a doomed generation of chemically-driven athletes.
The previous evening, Johan Bruyneel, Armstrong's former team manager, was forced out of the Luxemburg-based Radioshack team. The Belgian Cycling Federation alerted their prosecutor and did little to dampen speculation they will recommend a lifetime ban.
Should that occur, few tears will be shed for a man accused of being pivotal figure in what Usada described as "the most sophisticated, professionalised and successful doping programme that sport has ever seen".
In Italy, recently-retired cyclist Leonardo Bertagnolli was summoned to a hearing involving the Italian Olympic Committee's anti-doping prosecutor after revealing details of drug use supervised by the infamous Michele Ferrari, Armstrong's former doctor.
In Chicago, Christian Vande Velde, another member of Armstrong's tainted team, was dealing with his mother's shame after revealing his guilt to her. He admits he has yet to summon the courage to explain himself to his father John, a former Olympic track cyclist.
In Beijing, Matthew Dowsett, a British rider for Team Sky, recanted his belief in Armstrong as a "legend" in what bore all the hallmarks of a humiliating piece of PR-inspired penitence. Also in China, Pat McQuaid, the president of the UCI, cycling's global governing body, was under pressure, together with "honorary president" Hein Verbruggen, the IOC member whose denial that he said Armstrong "never, never, never" doped was torpedoed by the publishing, in Holland, of the transcript of his original interview.
His claims that the UCI "could have done nothing and did not hide anything" in an era of sophisticated doping merely confirmed the wisdom of David Millar's conviction that he has no part to play in a rehabilitated, recalibrated sport.
McQuaid's abject leadership skills were highlighted on Friday by his resistance to calls for cycling to set up a "truth and reconciliation" process. He suggested something similar at the London Olympics, retracted the idea at last month's World Championships, and now says an amnesty for the cheats is against the World Anti-Doping Agency code.
The enormity of the fraud needs to be exposed, and acknowledged, by its perpetrators, as the first stage in a process of renewal. Anecdotal evidence suggests the code of omerta, which allowed Armstrong to spread his poison, is being sustained by the fear that anyone re-opening Pandora's box would suffer reprisals.
The manifest failings of the UCI must be addressed. In return, athletes must accept that suspicion will be the neutral observer's default position until change is tangible.
As for Armstrong, he is in a netherworld of victimhood, and false heroism. The threat of legal action is potent, but his exposure as a common cheat carries little personal penalty, because he is conditioned to living a lie.
The real victims are those cancer sufferers, who invested in the mirage of his magnificence. Perhaps, instead of concentrating on the Livestrong celebrations, they should listen to the authentic voice of Lance Armstrong, as expressed the Usada report: "I can destroy you… We are going to fucking tear you apart… I am going to make your life a living fucking hell."
Saint Lance? Draw your own conclusions.
10 key questions over the Lance Armstrong affair
Can governing bodies be trusted to be self-policing?
The evidence suggests not. Governing bodies are conservative and self-protective of their sport. Usada's persistence in pursuing Armstrong suggests independent scrutiny of fundamental moral and financial issues is overdue. Usada's Armstrong file is in the hands of UCI lawyers, said UCI president Pat McQuaid on Friday.
Have Bradley Wiggins, and Team Sky, been compromised?
Undoubtedly. While the integrity of Wiggins and Dave Brailsford, director of the Tour de France-winning team, is unchallengeable, Sky's "zero tolerance" stance on drugs is open to question. Directeur Sportif Sean Yates, a close associate of Armstrong, says he knew nothing about the drug cheat's activities. How could he have understood so little?
Will the US attorney's investigation be renewed?
Federal prosecutors are under pressure to revive the process, terminated in February. A separate inquiry is being pursued by the Department of Justice. This was prompted by a lawsuit, filed by former team-mate Floyd Landis, which alleged Armstrong used public money to fund a doping programme.
Will Armstrong be stripped of his Olympic medal?
Yes, if the IOC value consistency and credibility. They have already stripped Tyler Hamilton, Armstrong's former team-mate, of the gold medal won in 2004. No, if they choose strictly to observe the eight-year statute of limitations, stipulated in the world anti-doping code. Armstrong won his bronze in 2000.
What are the precedents for prosecuting an athlete for perjury?
Marion Jones's fall from grace, after winning five medals in Sydney, was completed when she admitted lying to a jury about her use of drugs. She was convicted of perjury, and sentenced to six months in prison in 2008.
Are the UCI still taking legal action against Paul Kimmage?
The defamation case, brought against the former cyclist, turned campaigning journalist, is still due to be heard in the Swiss district court on 12 December. Donations to Kimmage's defence fund, which are more than £37,000, can be made through www.nyvelocity.com.
Will new winners of the seven tainted Tours de France be announced?
No, according to director Christian Prudhomme, whose plans to promote the centenary edition of the Tour, beyond its European heartland, are in tatters. He had little option – 20 of the 21 podium places between 1999 and 2005 were filled by riders associated with doping.
What are the implications for other sports?
Possibly profound. Italian football endured an EPO scandal in the late Nineties. Eufemiano Fuentes, the Spanish doctor exposed in cycling's Operacion Puerto, claims he also doped footballers and tennis players. Luis Garcia del Moral, banned for life for links to Armstrong, insists he was "medical advisor" to Barcelona and Valencia.
Will cycling's status as a boom sport be affected?
Probably not. The timing of the announcement of British cycling's success, in attracting a million new participants, was unfortunate, but drug controversies can be detached, at grassroots level, from the benefits of a healthy outdoor activity.
What about the Armstrong apologists?
They must live with their consciences. The most poignant case involves British TV commentator Phil Liggett. Many feel he compromised himself earlier this year with a bizarre pro-Armstrong, anti-Usada rant on South African radio, which quickly went viral.
Michael Calvin
I still think he won fair and square, but he was totally juiced.
I'd say you haven't read the report. Or a summary of the report.