Lance Armstrong

If you watch the late late show with Walsh and Roche from 10 odd years ago its not unrealistic to assume Roche could have turned into a right cunt if he was forced to defend himself. But we will never know now as Walsh has taken his foot off roches neck for some reason.

Thraenern, it was you if in not mistaken who posted a link yo that lls some months back, where Walsh was humiliated for basically presenting evidence that Roche was doping but it was too far back in time for it to he persued in court, dr. Bill was wheeled out to bat for the national hero. Shameful stuff all round but Walsh is finally vindicated on Armstrong so where to now for our own dopers? A book perhaps? Doubt it.

HBV, I don’t like Roche. But his and Kelly’s doping is nothing compared to the EPO generation of the last 22 years. (I know Roche most likely was on EPO at the tail end of his career but he didn’t win much then). And neither are anything like Lance. Any sports fan would know both doped.
Kimmage has said it was never about Lance, it was about trying to save cycling. For Walsh it was a bit more personal. But if either were to “go after” anyone now it would have to be the UCI. That’s who Kimmage railed against in Rough Ride and that’s who still need to be obliterated.

Lets not act like Lance was the first well known doper to defend himself - he just happened to hound those who did attack him in a way no other cyclist has done.

It was Lance’s brazenness that sets him apart. Running a programme on an industrial scale. Fancied himself as a MacGyver.

Walsh doesn’t let Roche off in his new book and refers extensively to Roches links to Ferrari. He also refers to that late late show and delivers a lovely coup de grace to that geebag Dr Bill.

i think that henry rollins should be the soundtrack to this thread, wouldnt be surprised if lance had 2 balls afterall

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_vgQalXaIxs

also, statute of limitations in the states is fucking useless being that its from the date of the perjury rather than from the date of discovery of it. lance should really be going down for perjury

Kimmage has written an article for the Observer.

A convincing 39 seconds, then back to the old Lance Armstrong

[font=arial]
The saddest story I’ve ever heard about sport was told to me in November 2010 by a man who cheated to win the Tour de France. We were sitting not in the plush surrounds of a five-star hotel in Texas, but in a sparsely furnished cabin in the San Jacinto mountains. Floyd Landis’s old racing bike was standing just inside the doorway; his underwear was drying on a clotheshorse; the cupboards were bare, the carpet was worn; it had been a while since President Bush had called.[/font]
[font=arial]
Darkness was falling on the mountain. Five hours had passed since he had begun telling his story and had covered most of the bases: his boyhood as a Mennonite, his doping apprenticeship with Lance Armstrong, his Tour de France win in July 2006 and the 12 months he spent lying after he tested positive. We have now reached the moment he knew the lying would have to stop.[/font]
[font=arial]
It’s 20 September 2007. He has just set off on a training ride from his home in San Diego when he receives a call from his lawyer, Maurice Suh. After a costly and protracted legal battle with the United States Anti-Doping Agency, the ruling on his positive test is about to be announced. “We should know in the next hour,” the lawyer says.[/font]
[font=arial]
Landis returns home immediately and waits in the garage. His wife, Amber, is sitting inside but he needs to be alone. The case has placed a desperate strain on their marriage. Every penny of their savings is riding on this call. Win, and the good times roll again. Lose, and they face ruin. Twenty minutes pass before the lawyer delivers the verdict. “We lost,” he says.[/font]
[font=arial]
Amber cries when she hears the news but Floyd burns with anger. He races upstairs to the living room and takes the most coveted prize in cycling – a beautiful porcelain bowl presented to the winner of Tour de France – from a cabinet. Amber knows what he’s thinking and follows him up the stairs but he has already raised it over his head when she comes through the door.[/font]
[font=arial]
“No Floyd!” she pleads. “It’s all we have.”[/font]
[font=arial]
He smashes it to the floor.[/font]
[font=arial]
“I had walked by that thing a hundred times [that year], and every single time I wanted to smash it,” Landis explained. “It had made me into something that I wasn’t. It represented a turning point in my life where I had to lie.”[/font]
[font=arial]
Lance Armstrong reached that turning point in 1999 but he’s not living in a shed in the San Jacinto mountains, and he hasn’t broken any porcelain yet. For the first 39 seconds of his interview with Oprah Winfrey, he was utterly convincing …[/font]
[font=arial]
Winfrey: “Did you ever take banned substances to enhance your cycling performance?”[/font]
[font=arial]
Armstrong: “Yes”[/font]
[font=arial]
Winfrey: “Was one of those banned substances EPO?”[/font]
[font=arial]
Armstrong: “Yes”[/font]
[font=arial]
Winfrey: “Did you ever blood-dope or use blood transfusions to enhance your cycling performance?”[/font]
[font=arial]
Armstrong: “Yes.”[/font]
[font=arial]
Winfrey: “Did you ever use other banned substances, such as testosterone, cortisone or human growth hormone?”[/font]
[font=arial]
Armstrong: “Yes.”[/font]
[font=arial]
Winfrey: “In all seven of your Tour de France victories, did you ever take banned blood substances or blood dope?”[/font]
[font=arial]
Armstrong: “Yes.”[/font]
[font=arial]
And then it was back to telling jokes.[/font]
[font=arial]
“I looked up the definition of cheat and the definition of cheat is to gain an advantage on a rival or foe that they don’t have. I didn’t view it that way. I viewed it as a level playing field.”[/font]
[font=arial]
“I never tested positive.”[/font]
[font=arial]
“Michele Ferrari is a good man.”[/font]
[font=arial]
“I don’t like the UCI.”[/font]
[font=arial]
“I care a lot about Christian [Vande Velde].”[/font]
[font=arial]
“I’m not going to lie to you or the public.”[/font]
[font=arial]
“I think I deserve it [to compete again].”[/font]
[font=arial]
“When I was diagnosed [with cancer in 1996] I was a better human being after that.”[/font]
[font=arial]
Or my favourite, hilarious: “The last time I crossed that line [doping] was 2005.”[/font]
[font=arial]
Armstrong has always shown a talent for pulling rabbits out of hats, but this was magic. He did not dope during his comeback in 2009 and 2010. Why not? Why would a guy who had doped with impunity, who didn’t even regard it as cheating, suddenly decide he was going to do it clean? Wait, he explains it…[/font]
[font=arial]
Because Kristin, his ex-wife, “believes in honesty and integrity and the truth” and asked him “never to cross that line again.” And “I never would have betrayed that with her”?[/font]
[font=arial]
Is this the same guy who dumped his wife for Sheryl Crow? Is this the same Kristin who, according to witness statements given to Usada, wrapped tablets in tin foil for Armstrong at the World Championships in Valkenberg? Who told a team-mate, Jonathan Vaughters, they kept EPO in the fridge? Who watched her husband vilify Betsy Andreu and did nothing?[/font]
[font=arial]
But the best act came last.[/font]
[font=arial]
“It’s an epic story,” Winfrey said. “What’s the moral to the story?”[/font]
[font=arial]
But moral (adj: 1 concerned with the principles of right and wrong behaviour) is not a word he has ever looked up. “I don’t have a great answer there,” he replied, and started faffing.[/font]
[font=arial]
“You know what I hope the moral to this story is,” Winfrey said. “I hope the moral to this story is what Kristin told you in 2009: ‘The truth will set you free’.”[/font]
[font=arial]
“Yeah,” he replied. “She continues to tell me that.”[/font]
[font=arial]
Cue piano music and the credits.[/font]
[font=arial]
Here’s my bottom line.[/font]
[font=arial]
In the autumn of 1993, Greg LeMond and his wife, Kathy, were sitting at home in the suburbs of Minneapolis, when they received a visit from Linda Mooneyham, the three-times Tour de France winner has recalled. Her 21-year-old son, Lance Armstrong, had just become the world champion and she had travelled from her home in Texas for advice.[/font]
[font=arial]
“What does he do now?” she asked. “What does he do with his money?”[/font]
[font=arial]
“Well, let him find an agent – a good one with an attorney,” LeMond replied. “And one word of advice – just be his mom.”[/font]
[font=arial]
They sat on the porch for a while and then moved inside to the kitchen. Linda had something else on her mind: “How do I make him less of an asshole. He doesn’t care about anyone.”[/font]
[font=arial]
“Well,” LeMond replied. “I can’t help you there.”[/font]

His ma summed him up there in that one sentence :lol:

[quote=Thrawneen" data-cid=“727664” data-time="1358629078]

HBV, I don’t like Roche. But his and Kelly’s doping is nothing compared to the EPO generation of the last 22 years. (I know Roche most likely was on EPO at the tail end of his career but he didn’t win much then). And neither are anything like Lance. Any sports fan would know both doped.
Kimmage has said it was never about Lance, it was about trying to save cycling. For Walsh it was a bit more personal. But if either were to “go after” anyone now it would have to be the UCI. That’s who Kimmage railed against in Rough Ride and that’s who still need to be obliterated.
[/quote]I would be amazed if Roche wasn’t on epo when he won the tour. All evidence points towards it.

done with google translate

OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF DOPING CONI

                                                               investigation procedure n. 48/04 
                                                     Legal & storage

It is received by the CONI decision no. 533-2003 ° wound dl of the Court, a single judge sitting in the person of Mr. Judge. Franca Oliva, issued in criminal proceedings against Francesco Conconi and others in the hearing of 19.11.2003 and filed February 16, 2004, became irrevocable for failure to appeal within the rite. This judgment was handed down by the sponsor of CONL, consisting party in the proceedings, Mr. Prof. Guido values. It should be remembered that Francesco Conconi, Ilario Casoni and Grazzi John had been charged, respectively, as Director of the Center for Biomedical Studies applied to sport at the University of Ferrara (hereinafter Center), the first, an official of the same structure, the second, and contributor to the structure as well as medical social Carrera cycling team until
1995, the third of the offense p. and p. Articles. 81 para., 110 Criminal Code and Article 1 of Law No. 401/1989 for the first two aggravated pursuant to Article 61 No. 9 cp, with more executive actions of the same criminal intention, at different times and in relation to more competitions organized by the FCI, the FIS and the FIDAL, national sports federations affiliated with CONI, or other foreign federations or sports bodies reviewed by the International Olympic Committee, in competition with each other, were making fraudulent acts in order to achieve, by improving the competitive performance artificially determined in athletes, a result different from that resulting from the proper and fair conduct of the competitions in which the same professional athletes should participate (such as eg.: Winter Olympic Games, World Championships, the Tour of Italy, Tour de France), which, through the following conduct:

administering erythropoietin, acting drug doping whose employment is prohibited dall’ordinanienio sports (IOC and CONI) (conduct put into effect by Grazzi only and only for the period from January to July 1993 as regards cyclists Bontempi, Chiappucci , Church, Roche and Sorensen)
in other cases and periods: performing sampling and analysis of blood and other tests cynical and biomechanical analysis and processing data, a systemic character on professional athletes on the list below, taking care of the preparation physics, in implementation of the agreements concluded by the hundred with CONI and contracts with the aforementioned national sports federations and cycling teams or with individual athletes;
contollando while the health of the athletes during periods of employment by the same erythropoietin known to the accused thereby interacting with the treatment and at facilitating, promoting and contributing to random doping of athletes themselves.
's list of athletes is as follows:

  1. Guido Bontempi;
  2. Maurizio Fondriest;
    regarding the conduct of Conconi and Casoni:
  3. Albarello Marco;
  4. DeZolt Maurilio;
  5. Fauner Silvio;
  6. Polvara Giafranco;
  7. Vanzetta Giorgio;
    6 . Di Centa Manuela
  8. Eugeni Berzin;
  9. Bobrik Vladislav;
  10. Cenghialta Bruno,
  11. Francesco Frattini,
  12. Giorgio Furlan,
    l2. Gotti lvan;
  13. Minali Nicola,
  14. Santaromita Antonio;
  15. Ugrumov Piotr
  16. Alberto Volpi,
    regarding the conduct of Conconi and grains:
  17. Checchin Stephen
  18. Claudio Chiappucci;
  19. Mario church;
  20. Maximum Ghiotto
  21. Marco Pantani;
  22. P ulnikov Wladimir
    7. Stephen Roche
  23. Fabio Roscioli;
  24. Siboni Marcello;
  25. Rolf Sorensen,
  26. Zaina Henry;
    regarding the conduct of only Conco ni:
  27. Bugno Giaqrji;
  28. in Milan Mauritius;
  29. Della Bianca Louis;
  30. Scaunich Emma. I n summary, the Judge, after pointing out that a

"long and complex investigation was carried out by NAS Carabinieri Florence and Bologna … through a massive acquisition of documents and witness statements " also refers to the results of the appraisal office made ​​at the preliminary hearing before the examining magistrate of Ferrara, to establish the correctness of the technical-scientific sampling procedures, analyzes and surveys carried out against athletes followed by the Centre, the reading and the true value due to specific "data and documents introjected in the body of evidence of the proceedings ", as well as some mutual coherence between those data and documents, the lack of technical value of a number of issues specifically raised the accused Conconi, reliability, which correspond to the real, the allegations made ​​by hematocrit values ​​taken from the file named DBLAB and the complex history of the proceedings the outcome of which was received by the wording of the indictment only just now transcribed. So, it is not in force at the material time the law n. ° 376/2000 and, therefore, unable to take legal action to relevant facts under the profile of doping, the judging has raised the issue of whether in 'order, however, there was a criminal law that foresaw and punished as a criminal offense the accused of the offense, after a long disquisition on the paragraph containing references to precedents, the judges came to the conclusion of having to assume that the facts alleged in the present case fell within the concrete crime of terrorism planned and punished by art.1 of Law no. ° 401/1989 (sporting fraud).
Retrieved, then, the broad framework of evidence acquired, the judges held that in this case it was found that "the defendants have for a few years and with absolute continuity flanked athletes listed in the count of indictment and their assumption of erythropoietin, supporting and encouraging them in fact ‘taking itself with their soothing and guarantees network controls the state of health of tests, analyzes, tests designed to evaluate and optimize the results of’ assumption in view of the sports scores, and actually interacting in the “treatment” and encouraging, as contested, and, of course, providing all logistical support acts to prolong the assumption of erythropoietin. " The Court, then, has highlighted items from surveys carried out on the files and documents seized such as large fluctuations in some blood parameters indicative that we were able to observe the sequence of tests performed on athletes in relation to their physiological values, defined as “monstrous” by experts d ’ office, the fact that the oscillations were verified in correspondence of “precise time periods” (low values ​​in periods of competition, and, therefore, progressively increasing up to reach exceptionally high values ​​close to the races), the fact that the oscillations of so high flow had mostly taken place in the sports-called “resistance,” the potentialto benefit more in the presence of treatments with erythropoietin, has removed with the help of the expertise of the Office of the thesis defense ’ defendant Conconi, defining "not realistic"motivation from these indicated to justify the fluctuations in blood gave note of the analysis and processing of data provided by the experts of office, their findings and their conclusions; concluded by stating that in order "can not therefore deny the severity and uniqueness of the picture evidence against the defendants. " detected, then, that the alleged offenses occurred after 9.8.1995 was not gathered sufficient evidence against the accused, the Court of Ferrara decided declaring the termination of the alleged offenses the accused was time-barred limited to events occurring up to 09.08.1995 and assolvendoli the crimes being prosecuted in respect of events occurring after the same date with the formula “the crime does not exist.”
Judgment of the Court dl Ferrara and the jumble of facts in which it applied undoubtedly provide the public broad views and scenery of the bleak landscape of doping science as applied to sport in a conscious, diligent and focused, and offer ample material for the opening of a proceeding 'investigation against all the athletes on the list just now reported as part of the Office of Public Prosecutor . Their protagonists on one side are doctors who seem to have no scruples in the study and test the effects of doping in athletes, not sparing the their efforts in this regard and, moreover, using, in pursuing their own ends, public funds on the basis of agreements with the CONI and some federations or sports teams, are the other athletes whose names are or have been high resonance , probably motivated by the lure of the acquisition of outstanding results at the international level and medals, have lent themselves to act as guinea pigs and subjected to serious risk their salutes. The evidence that the Court of Ferrara was able to collect in order to events occurring up to the lumping together of positive findings and outcome of laboratory tests that provide the same degree of certainty, ie the certainty that comes from having elements probative force as almost insurmountable, so it is entirely unnecessary to hearing athletes above in view of the factthat the expected time from the date of the occurrence of the facts that they could and should have criticized the individual athletes has meant that its illegal disciplinary assessed by the judge, all in relation to events that occurred up to 9.8.1995, the following ones were not tested, must be declared to be largely extinct once the limitation period provided for disciplinary offenses by the current anti-doping rules, not the conseguendone enforceability.
However, this attorney can not fail to note that the overall view that has emerged from the reading of the judgment under review (which is attached to this decision) is very depressing, all the more if you think that a large part of the sport followed by center directed by prof. Conconi were (in some cases still are) athletes of international standing and prestigious for the mass of results collected in his career, and many of them still today no longer play competitive sports, and are members in positions of leadership or responsibility major technical (in terms of international teams) in the context of sports federations to which they belong, up to represent the Italian sport at the highest level in international fora.
Everything Now, therefore, this power of attorney, in reporting to the President of CONI the opportunity to transmit to the federations concerned (FCI, FISI, FIDAL) this measure and the attached judgment 533/03 of the Court of Ferrara, to evaluate the impact of the seriousness of events can have on their image and credibility of the action from their provided in the interest of the sport, has

No it doesn’t

Bullet points Foley?

italian judge finds that roche and several other doped with epo up to 95

no cause of action due to statute of limitations

omerta of cyclists

http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showthread.php?t=9589]http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showthread.php?t=9589

No it doesn’t

EPO came into use early 90’s. Mainly Italian users at first, they had some remarkable results around that time. Do not believe it was around in 87. The nature of stage racing changed with EPO it was more ‘controlled’.

Rovhe was not clean for the duration of his career, even his apologists on here ate admitting that. He used bully boy tactics against Walsh on live tv when presented with evidence. He used Pat Kenny and his iridh hero status to turn the public mob on Walsh for presenting this evidence. He knew Walsh wad telling the truth When he did this but he was willing to drag Walsh reputation down in the process. No regard for Walsh or his career or the truth, just himself. This is scumbag behaviour. What lenghts would he go to in order to defend himself is the real question because he seems a nasty piece of work on the late late evidence alone.
The Irish public deserve to know there are question marks over Roche and that national hard man Kelly took drugs throughout his career and in a sport where nobody gets caught he was caught twice. Very few citizens are aware of these facts because the Irish media will not go there and the Irish cycling community are in denial.

Roche and Kelly were elite cyclists with or without doping. The level playing field argument actually does apply to them. Armstrong only won his titles because he was on the best juice available and one step ahead of the peloton.

If the entire peloton was clean I believe Kelly and Roche would still have won most of their titles, I don’t believe that is the case with Armstrong. When Roche won the tour and giro in 1987 he was on a team that was systematically doping and was going head to head with Delgado, another doper. It’s safe to assume he was doping too.

Cycling is a dirty, dirty sport. As people have pointed out the UCI are the bad guys and are the ones that need to be hounded. I don’t see what a witch hunt against Roche or Kelly will achieve.

I’ve posted this before, the trend of average speeds on the Tour. Apart from a big spike around 80/81 average speeds were really no better in the 80’s than in the 60’s, even allowing for better bikes etc. But the average speeds really take off from the late 80’s. Also need to point out that the stages were much longer until 1987 after which the overall race distance decreased. And of course there have been major improvements in bikes, technology and preparation :). Interesting to note how average speeds have decreased since the middle of the 00’s

<img src=“http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/39/Overall_Speed_Tour_de_France.gif” alt="Overall_Speed_Tour_de_France.gif]

[quote=Sandymount Red" data-cid=“727724” data-time="1358675057]

Roche and Kelly were elite cyclists with or without doping. The level playing field argument actually does apply to them. Armstrong only won his titles because he was on the best juice available and one step ahead of the peloton.

If the entire peloton was clean I believe Kelly and Roche would still have won most of their titles, I don’t believe that is the case with Armstrong. When Roche won the tour and giro in 1987 he was on a team that was systematically doping and was going head to head with Delgado, another doper. It’s safe to assume he was doping too.

Cycling is a dirty, dirty sport. As people have pointed out the UCI are the bad guys and are the ones that need to be hounded. I don’t see what a witch hunt against Roche or Kelly will achieve.
[/quote]I partly agree, but the real crime was the witchunt against the people trying to expose the cheating by the protagonists. They cannot have it both ways. People died trying to emulate the dopers, let us not forget that, more than a few of them.

Real head in the sand stuff here from the Irish cycling fraternity.
So the dopers who preceded lance are not important to the real story…well some of them are but it depends on where they hail from and whether they were nice lads as opposed to assholes. leave them off it will achieve nothing, they were good lads before drugs were invented, the drugs didn’t make them peddle any faster, they were real hard men blah blah blah.

Its a scandal and a shame that Ireland has been to the forefront of the Armstrong dethroning (Walsh, kimmage, Emily O’Reilly) yet is quite content to turn a blind eye on our own two dopers in the same sport and instead make national heros of them. Instead target an administrator who didn’t take drugs but whose grime was to turn the blind eye to those who did. Sure McWuaid is only guilty of doing what all Irish cycling enthusiasts are doing… Turning a blind eye.
What a joke of a nation we are.