That's the whole irony in this. They are all at it. Consequently if none of them doped, Armstrong would probably still have won. Weird, huh? They pointed out on Swiss TV (or was it French?) that because of dopers, they are having to declare the guy who came in about 7th or 8th in some of the Tours he "won" as the winner. That's how bad it is.
It's all very sad. Especially as the problems they have, trying to decide who the wins should be accorded too due to the number of 2nd and 3rd placedfinishers having been subsequently tested as positive it seems Mr Armstrong was probably competing in a level playing field anyway. No view on whether he cheated or not, we are both keen followers of the Tour De france and it's just sad.
But who has jurisdiction to declare who won or did not win the TdeF. USADA have stripped Armstrong of his titles but they were given by the UCI. I wanted to believe but it always had a slightly unbelievable aspect to it. I remember watching on TV when Floyd Landis came back with an amazing performance the day after he crashed and burned in the 2006 TdeF and thinking this can't be happening. Many of the 'greats' have subsequently admitted to doping during the time Armstrong was winning. The circumstantial evidence is overwhelming, it will be interesting to see what is published by the USADA.
This is my enduring image of Lance Armstrong. Tour de France-Lance Armstrong's Crash & Recovery - YouTube Pretty gutsy for a man recovering/in remission from testicular cancer. It's soured the pot a little for me but the man still remains a legend in my eyes. Hopefully his cancer charity will not fall by the wayside because of this. LIVESTRONG.org
He is a cancer in the sport as Sunday Times cycling journalist Paul Kimmage famously said,at that imfamous press conference.
I'm not sure of the process from here in but USADA doesn't have the right to strip him of his titles, his world championship or Olympic medal. That's the UCI. The UCI didn't back the arbitration and I wouldn't mind betting that they've gauranteed to Lance that they won't strip his titles so it will only be bluster from USADA. By not contesting he buries the evidence that would have come out if he'd gone through arbitration, which is a little on the convenient side. Whether he's guilty or not is very difficult to understand but he certainly looks guilty to me.
Are there any samples about, absolute proof.............or is it all circumstance......still he looks guilty...
Whatever happened to innocent until proven guilty? Apart for the USADA making the McCarthy witch hunt look like a simple pub quiz, it's just another example of the US thinking that it owns the whole sodding world!
This graphic shows how endemic doping is in Le Tour. A level playing field is easy to achieve. Let them dope. Armstrong was up against fellow dopers and owned the race for 7 years. Now he's done more for cancer awareness than anyone in recent memory. He is a legend. I couldn't care less he doped.
Guys, I think doping was endemic, but not so much now. Cyclists are the most tested athletes and the grand Tours always bring out some nonentity wanting to make a name for themselves by catching people at.it. I think Armstrong probably is guilty, but the fact remains that he passed hundreds of tests and never failed one. Worth remembering that every major scandal that's hit cycling also casts a shadow on tennis, fussball and even F1. Is it Wenger who said that every young Spanish player he got had abnormal blood values?
