Jump to content
Brewer Fanatic

Lance Armstrong gives up fight against doping charges


RU Rah Rah

I tend to be a cynic about accusations of PED's, doping, and the like. So part of me always has been skeptical of Armstrong's repeated claims of innocence. But his defense (he never failed a drug test) isn't exactly the worst I've ever heard. Now, of course, Armstrong has given up fighting the doping charges -- without admitting guilt.

 

This is a weird one for me. I find it hard to believe that there is a massive ongoing conspiracy to frame him for something he didn't do, but I'm bothered by the process here. I guess my official position is: maybe he doped, but it's absurd to pursue him now, given the passage of time and his success in mastering (either legitimately or not) the testing process that was supposed to regulate this stuff. (Admittedly, that's not much of an argument.)

 

Any thoughts?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Recommended Posts

Community Moderator

I think he finally realized that the evidence against him was overwhelming and it wasn't worth fighting the losing battle anymore. There's no "smoking gun" but with the number of first-hand accusations I can't possibly believe that he never doped, especially since virtually every other champion has done it in that sport. It's basically an admission of guilt that he won't continue...he knew the titles would be stripped either way so he gave it up.

 

In the highly unlikely event that Armstrong is innocent, he earned his fate anyway because of his personality--all those bridges that he burned came back on him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He is too old to race anymore any way and he has probably said enough is enough. Just move on with his life.

 

Considering the doping issues in cycling I find it hard to believe that he was so dominant without cheating. I can't fault him that much because the whole sport was doing it but there is no doubt in my mind that he did.

 

He and Barry Bonds absolutely dominated their respective sports at the height of the drug scandals. There is simply no way that they were naturally that much better than the people who were cheating trying to catch them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When it comes to cheating scandals like this, college football recruitment violations, etc., I hate when they strip winners of whatever they've won. Go ahead and punish/fine/suspend/etc. whomever you want but stripping past victories/championships doesn't really do anything for me. Everybody knows who really won, even if it might've been by doing something against the rules. I will always remember that Armstrong (as much as I dislike the guy) won all those TDFs, that Reggie Bush won the heisman, Bonds hit all those HRs ( I know he wasn't stripped of anything, just making a point), etc. Stripping people of their accomplishments doesn't really do anything IMO.
This is Jack Burton in the Pork Chop Express, and I'm talkin' to whoever's listenin' out there.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

cycling needs to get its act together so that it's not one organization after another asking the same questions. guilty or innocent, he doesn't need to be fighting the same charges again and again. Double Jeopardy, anyone (though i know these aren't all US organizations). still, he's been fighting this stuff since 1999--that's an awful long time. just imagine if the guy was/is innocent, or if he was someone who didn't have the time or money to keep fighting this.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

When it comes to cheating scandals like this, college football recruitment violations, etc., I hate when they strip winners of whatever they've won. Go ahead and punish/fine/suspend/etc. whomever you want but stripping past victories/championships doesn't really do anything for me. Everybody knows who really won, even if it might've been by doing something against the rules. I will always remember that Armstrong (as much as I dislike the guy) won all those TDFs, that Reggie Bush won the heisman, Bonds hit all those HRs ( I know he wasn't stripped of anything, just making a point), etc. Stripping people of their accomplishments doesn't really do anything IMO.

 

I agree. The whole JoePa thing causes issues too since Penn St. apparently won 100 or so less games. It's not like they will go back and re-evaluate the teams that Penn State played and redetermine how the bowl games should have played out, etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When you strip someone of something like this, do they go back and give the second place person the title? Or go back and change all those losses to wins for PSU opponents? Almost always this answer is no...unless they get tested immediately (see the Olympics). If you aren't going to change the records or you're not going to redeclare a champion, then whats the point of doing it at all?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Most of the second place winners have been convicted of doping or are suspected of same. Even Contador was suspended for a while although the charges against him were questionable. Ulrich, who was his main rival for much of this time, has been convicted. I think it has become a witch hunt whether he is guilty or not and he did right not to bankrupt himself defending against continuous charges.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is not like Lance Armstrong would ever win the case anyways. The American anti-doping agency would have kept on bringing civil suits against him. In the eyes of the American anti-doping agency the athlete has no rights at all and shouldn't even be able to defend themselves. In Braun's case I believe the president of the American anti-doping agency stated that Braun would have been suspended no matter what if they were in charge. I think he even went on to state that false positives are not a problem and that in the case of Braun he would be suspended without even a chance to defend himself as they wouldn't even hear a case for him.

 

In the eyes of the American anti-doping agency they have a policy of the athlete has no right to defend themselves and they are to take the punishment no matter what even if it is a false positive test.

 

I don't really care if Armstrong did roids or used performance enhancing drugs. It didn't even really matter as nearly every single participant in those events were using some kind of illegal drug so Armstrong really didn't have an advantage over anyone really.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It didn't even really matter as nearly every single participant in those events were using some kind of illegal drug so Armstrong really didn't have an advantage over anyone really.

 

That's the thing. Unlike the previous poster who said that winning 7 titles must mean he had an advantage, I'm more on the side of the above statement. There's little doubt in my mind that everyone was doping in that time period, and while it would be disappointing if in fact Lance did cheat, his accomplishments are astounding. He was so much better than everyone else.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If they were all doping and Lance was still that much better than everyone; then he probably just had better drugs. I don't think it is as obvious as someone like Barry Bonds or Sammy Sosa; but I still tend to believe he did it. Even if he did dope I still feel his feats were rather incredible though.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cycling is (still) very big in italy, the brother of one of my teammate was a first year Propro 7 years ago. He was making 27000 euro a year and he spent 23000 a year for doctors and....stuff....

 

His brother told me you arrive at one point that you invested so much in time money sacrifice to become a pro that doping is not a choice, is only another step of your career. He also told me that is brother didn't know of any corridor really clean.

 

My friend's brother was caught cheating 5 years ago, he is not a pro anymore.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • 1 month later...

Just got this "Breaking News" email from CNN:

 

The U.S. Anti-Doping Agency says it will release more than 1,000 pages of evidence detailing the involvement of cyclist Lance Armstrong in what the agency calls "the most sophisticated, professionalized and successful doping program that sport has ever seen."

Armstrong, who won an unprecedented seven Tour de France titles, announced in August that he would no longer fight doping charges that the agency brought against him.

 

Also, anyone see the 9.79* 30 for 30 about the 1988 Olympic 100 meter event? Just more evidence that PED's were a way of life in professional sports back then.

User in-game thread post in 1st inning of 3rd game of the 2022 season: "This team stinks"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

I think it had to do with the self promotion and constant in your face, Lance Armstrong is the greatest of all time, adoration heaped upon him while he constantly denied any accusation of doping and intimidated and threatened people who spoke against him while everyone around him and associated with him was getting busted for it.

 

There are still people who think he didn't dope, my boss (not even a hard core cycle fan, more of a wannabe) used to argue vehemently that he was clean and that someone like him couldn't have doped, he is a cancer survivor, blah blah... as if that exempts him from cheating.

 

Barry Bonds is/was one of my favorite players, I know he took steroids along with most of the league when he played. I think the government going after him was a waste of time and money especially given how many other guys have been busted or admited/denied and failed tests. But Bonds was never put on the pedestal of Armstrong and even Armstrong didn't have to face a U.S. Government attack and attempt of jail time.

 

I liken the Armstrong supporters to the PSU fans who delusionally keep acting as if their institution did no wrong and punishment heaped upon them is unfair.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think all the good that has come from his career should grant him some sort of reprieve at least in terms of public image. Unlike PSU, his "crime" didn't hurt anyone.

 

I personally couldn't care less about him. I read his biography for a class in college and he came off as a total piece of crap person even with someone else writing the words.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think he'll be a punchline on Leno for about a week, and then people will go back to not caring. I'm not sure this news was a surprise to anyone. I agree, he seems like a total jerk, and I agree that he's raised enough money and done enough good to earn my apathy.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I care about Armstrong only because he is an American playing in a very global sport. He cheated, denied it, was very much in the face of his accusers, all the while wearing the USPS logo.

 

He was the All American jackass, representing us on a global scale, doing harm to the US's image.

 

Other than that, I don't much care about who wins the Tour de France.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He was the All American jackass, representing us on a global scale, doing harm to the US's image.

 

On the list of people ruining the U.S.'s image Lance Armstrong falls no where near relevant.

 

Sez you.

 

To a lot of people, their impression of a place is formed by its celebrated. Michael Phelps, Lance Armstrong, Michael Jordan, Lebron James, Tiger Woods, Katy Perry, Lady Gaga, Kobe Bryant. . .international sports celebs, pop stars, Hollywood. . .all of that stuff is an American export.

 

In the developing world, western pop culture counts for a lot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

The Twins Daily Caretaker Fund
The Brewer Fanatic Caretaker Fund

You all care about this site. The next step is caring for it. We’re asking you to caretake this site so it can remain the premiere Brewers community on the internet. Included with caretaking is ad-free browsing of Brewer Fanatic.

×
×
  • Create New...