"The Lance Armstrong lie"

[Darkiller]

There you go.
Front page news today : "ARMSTRONG LIED"

It is now proven that he took EPO when he won his 1st Tour de France in 1999...man that is going to get ugly now.

[rkmsuf]

They all lie and take stuff. No big whoop.

[Jon]

Well, since it's on the front page of a newspaper it must be true.... :)

Is there a link?

[cartman]

Well, since it's on the front page of a newspaper it must be true.... :)

Is there a link?

Yep, but it's in French...

I'm not sure how long EPO stays in the system, but he did admit he used EPO during his recovery to boost his cell count after chemo treatments.

[Darkiller]

http://www.lequipe.fr/Fonctions/pages_quotidien.html

France's #1 daily sports newspaper

[Huckleberry]

The complete text of Lance Armstrong's statement, which was posted on his official Web site late Monday:





"Yet again, a European newspaper has reported that I have tested positive for performance enhancing drugs. Tomorrow's L'Equipe, a French sports daily, is reporting that my 1999 samples were positive. Unfortunately, the witch hunt continues and tomorrow's article is nothing short of tabloid journalism.



The paper even admits in its own article that the science in question here is faulty and that I have no way to defend myself. They state: "There will therefore be no counter-exam nor regulatory prosecutions, in a strict sense, since defendant's rights cannot be respected."

I will simply restate what I have said many times: I have never taken performance enhancing drugs."
Interesting.

[Darkiller]

here is a better link with a short explanation text :
http://sports.yahoo.com/sc/photo?slug=r893642706&prov=reuters

[Jon]

Thanks for the link.

[JonInMiddleGA]

http://sports.myway.com/news/08232005/v7814.html

Looks like typical jealously, more hating-on-Lance.

The national anti-doping laboratory in Chatenay-Malabry, which developed the EPO test and analyzed the urine samples in question, said it could not confirm that the positive EPO results were Armstrong's.

It noted that the samples were anonymous, bearing only a a six-digit number to identify the rider, and could not be matched with the name of any one cyclist.

However, L'Equipe said it was able to make the match. It printed photos of what it said were official doping documents. On one side of the page, it showed what it said were the results of EPO tests from anonymous riders used for lab research. On the other, it showed Armstrong's medical certificates, signed by doctors and riders after doping tests - and bearing the same identifying number printed on the results.

So what we have basically are "anonymous" tests, claims that they've been matched up anyway, all courtesy of a report in a newspaper that's owned by the same company that organizes {gasp} the TdF.

Let's see here ... we've got an event that just lost the best thing that ever happened to it ... interest is going to drop, maybe considerably ... I know, let's discredit the guy & try to make the event look better without him.

[Darkiller]

like T.O used to say, "when it smells rats, it is a rat" :D

[Anthony]

i wish the French were this devoted to stopping terrorsim instead OF A FUCKING BIKE RACE.

[jeff061]

The French have some major inferiority issues. I don't see a story about a French athlete in the US making the front page, as well as three additional pages.

[Mustang]

meh.. oh well. What else do you expect from them?

If a French Football team came over and won the Super Bowl 7 times in a row, I'm sure our media would have a field day trying to discredit them. Media loves building people up and tearing them down.

fuckers...

[terpkristin]

Plus, why release it NOW, a good 6 years after the fact?
I know, they say they didn't have the "scientific results" until now, but that just makes the science even more wooly. What a crock of jealousy.

/tk

[John Galt]

I find it strange that people are so dismissive here and so condemning in the Bonds steroid threads (where there isn't even a test based on old samples).

[Huckleberry]

John -

I agree that if good science says it, then that's the way it is. The difference between Bonds and Armstrong is that we know Armstrong has passed roughly 5,000 tests.

[rkmsuf]

I find it strange that people are so dismissive here and so condemning in the Bonds steroid threads (where there isn't even a test based on old samples).


Nobody cares about bike racing?

[John Galt]

John -

I agree that if good science says it, then that's the way it is. The difference between Bonds and Armstrong is that we know Armstrong has passed roughly 5,000 tests.

Since I've always felt Bonds was more likely to be using HGH (a non-testable substance) because of the very precise way he answered questions about steroids, I think his situation is pretty analogous to Armstrong's (given that EPO used to be a non-testable substance). I'm not saying either person is guilty or not guilty, but the reactions seem see cut and dry extreme in both directions. And I find that strange.

[Pumpy Tudors]

Nobody cares about bike racing?
Did somebody get lost on their way to a hockey thread?

[rkmsuf]

Did somebody get lost on their way to a hockey thread?


I knew the hockey lovers would be hanging out in here!

[Draft Dodger]

There you go.
Front page news today : "ARMSTRONG LIED"

It is now proven that he took EPO when he won his 1st Tour de France in 1999...man that is going to get ugly now.

will it surprise me to find out that Armstrong doped? nope.
am I more than a little annoyed that you are naive or vindictive enough to pass this crap off as "proof"? yep

[gottimd]

Maybe he took EPO with Emo while listening to ELO?

[John Galt]

This is the ESPN article, BTW, which seems to explain what the French article says:

http://sports.espn.go.com/oly/news/story?id=2140893

[Ksyrup]

To paraphrase whoever it was on Freddy Adu and soccer, this news is going to revolutionize the way I don't pay attention to cycling and Lance Armstrong.

[Lathum]

The French have some major inferiority issues. I don't see a story about a French athlete in the US making the front page, as well as three additional pages.
does such a thing exist?

[Anthony]

that was that bad French basketball player the Knicks drafted about 4 or 5 years ago, who took him instead of Ron Artest.

he wound up getting dunked on by Vince Carter in the Olympics i think.

[cartman]

I don't see a story about a French athlete in the US making the front page, as well as three additional pages.

Well, to be fair, Zidane did make the front page in 1998. It said "For more info on Zidane and the French World Cup team, see page 8 in the sports section"

:D

[Maple Leafs]

Prediction: if and when Armstrong is proven to have doped (and I have no idea if this article actually proves anything), the American sports media will not go with the story. It will either be buried, or discredited. There has been too much time spent building Armstrong into a national hero to tear him down now based on anything short of a personal admission of guilt.

As John Galt points out, the same people that will gladly convict a baseball player on circumstantial evidence will refuse to accept any evidence offered against Armstrong -- there will also be some loophole that will allow them to dispute it.

And a further prediction -- people will take this issue extremely personally (on both sides).

[HomerJSimpson]

Since I've always felt Bonds was more likely to be using HGH (a non-testable substance) because of the very precise way he answered questions about steroids, I think his situation is pretty analogous to Armstrong's (given that EPO used to be a non-testable substance). I'm not saying either person is guilty or not guilty, but the reactions seem see cut and dry extreme in both directions. And I find that strange.


So, Armstrongs friend and trainer was indicted for distributing steriods? I didn't know that. :D

[gottimd]

What is EPO? Can it be linked to some sort of treatment for Armstrongs condition?

[panerd]

Prediction: if and when Armstrong is proven to have doped (and I have no idea if this article actually proves anything), the American sports media will not go with the story. It will either be buried, or discredited. There has been too much time spent building Armstrong into a national hero to tear him down now based on anything short of a personal admission of guilt.

As John Galt points out, the same people that will gladly convict a baseball player on circumstantial evidence will refuse to accept any evidence offered against Armstrong -- there will also be some loophole that will allow them to dispute it.

And a further prediction -- people will take this issue extremely personally (on both sides).

Ah, the American sports media would love nothing better than an Armstrong doping story. Just look at the coverage Palmeiro is getting.

[Hurst2112]

meh.. oh well. What else do you expect from them?

If a French Football team came over and won the Super Bowl 7 times in a row, I'm sure our media would have a field day trying to discredit them.

fuckers...

53 limp-wristed guys...imagine the half time shows!!!! and the post game celebrations!

;) :D

[John Galt]

Ah, the American sports media would love nothing better than an Armstrong doping story. Just look at the coverage Palmeiro is getting.

I don't think Palmeiro is considered a national hero and I haven't seen too many people wearing Palmeiro bracelets.

[gottimd]

I don't think Palmeiro is considered a national hero and I haven't seen too many people wearing Palmeiro bracelets.
I took mine off that fateful day. I felt violated.

[John Galt]

So, Armstrongs friend and trainer was indicted for distributing steriods? I didn't know that. :D

Dated tesst of B samples show positive results v. guilt by association. I'm not taking a position on which is more damning, but I think it is strange that people come down so clearly on opposite extremes and don't see any inconsistency. And I thought it was the case that there have been known associates of Armstrong that have been busted and/or have said they have seen Armstrong using (I could be wrong because generally I fall in the Ksyrup camp when it comes to cycling). While those people may be unreliable, I think the testimony is probably stronger than that against Bonds (whose friends still deny giving him stuff - for whatever that is worth).

[HomerJSimpson]

Prediction: if and when Armstrong is proven to have doped (and I have no idea if this article actually proves anything), the American sports media will not go with the story. It will either be buried, or discredited. There has been too much time spent building Armstrong into a national hero to tear him down now based on anything short of a personal admission of guilt.

As John Galt points out, the same people that will gladly convict a baseball player on circumstantial evidence will refuse to accept any evidence offered against Armstrong -- there will also be some loophole that will allow them to dispute it.

And a further prediction -- people will take this issue extremely personally (on both sides).


I love revisionist history. Rumors of baseball doping were around for years, and no body believed them. The press largely ignore the story, and the few times it was brought up (like during the Sosa/McGuire HR chase), people were shouted down or told that it "wouldn't even help." It wasn't until the BALCO indictments (again, remember, Bond's personal trainer and "good friend" whom he connected/introduce to a number of other players) that people started believing there was a steriod problem. And even then, it took leaked grand jury testimony from a number of players admitting steriod use for people to admit that they had been using. People didn't suddenly jump to conclusions on things. It took years before it exploded.

Now compare this to Armstong. He is the most drug-tested man on earth. The French would love to find any reason to prove he is doping to confirm what they already "know." They hate the man with the burning passions of a thousand suns. Are we now supposed to be excited that they test one several year old specimen and found trace of a drug that Armstrong has already admitted that he took during rehab for cancer? Were is the comparison here?

[Maple Leafs]

Ah, the American sports media would love nothing better than an Armstrong doping story. Just look at the coverage Palmeiro is getting.I doubt it. Palmeiro was an almost perfect target -- famous and beloved enough to be a big story, but not so famous and beloved that there was much risk of a backlash.

Time will tell and I could be wrong, but look at the ESPN coverage already -- the storyline is not "shocking new evidence of Armstrong doping", it's "Armstrong forced to endure yet another 'witch hunt' at hands of spiteful french".

[Raiders Army]

I'd dope too if I lost a nut.

[Huckleberry]

I guess for me the difference is that I know a lot about baseball. Bonds' career screams artificial help in his mid-to-late 30s. Plus his head is ginormous. And the leaked testimony where he admitted taking it but took the popular "I didn't know it" defense. It took only months of a spotlight on Bonds before shit started pouring out. 7 years of intense focus on Armstrong by an entire nation of "journalists" has produced nothing on him. And now we've got anonymous tests that they have said they matched to him anyway. Smell tests go a long way. But Darkiller's smeller is broken.

And, for the record, my affinity levels for the two have nothing to do with it. I think they're both assholes.

[HomerJSimpson]

Dated tesst of B samples show positive results v. guilt by association. I'm not taking a position on which is more damning, but I think it is strange that people come down so clearly on opposite extremes and don't see any inconsistency. And I thought it was the case that there have been known associates of Armstrong that have been busted and/or have said they have seen Armstrong using (I could be wrong because generally I fall in the Ksyrup camp when it comes to cycling). While those people may be unreliable, I think the testimony is probably stronger than that against Bonds (whose friends still deny giving him stuff - for whatever that is worth).


Read post posted while you posted this post. :D

Give me a real smoking gun here. This test could easily be showing the remenants of the drug he took while in rehab. Not exactly a smoking gun coming from people who loved bring Armstrong down.

[Maple Leafs]

Give me a real smoking gun here. This test could easily be showing the remenants of the drug he took while in rehab. Not exactly a smoking gun coming from people who loved bring Armstrong down.
If the test is legit and can be trusted, it shows that he was using a banned substance when he won his first Tour. Even if it was related to his cancer treatment, it's still a banned performance enhancer in his system -- one that was suspected to be widely in use because at the time it couldn't be deteced in tests.

Besides, the ESPN story makes no reference to the drug being tied to his treatment.

[Kodos]

It's too bad that French athletes aren't good at any American sports so that we could try to discredit their achievements.

[vtbub]

L'Equip's article online translated via Google:


ARMSTRONG IN THE STORM

Thunder clap. One month after having taken down its seventh victory in the Turn of France this summer, Launches Armstrong, reprocessed young person, reconsiders the front of the scene. But it is this time question of doping. Six of its urinary samples, collected at the time of the Turn 1999 and analyzed a posteriori by the laboratory of Châtenay-Malabry, are marked signature of the EPO. In her edition of Thursday August 23, the TEAM brings the proof from there. However, Texan continues to deny to have doped itself on its Internet site.

Official documents with the support
Often suspected, ever controlled positive. Lance Armstrong, increases sevenfold victorious Outer Loop, is found today under fires of the slope for another thing that its sporting exploits. The newspaper the Team , documents official with the support, shows indeed that the American had well recourse to doping products in 1999, at the time of its first conquest of the Turn of France.

Four months of investigation by the sporting daily newspaper led to this obviousness. The facts are indisputable: the leader of Discovery Channel, during six seasons with the US head Postal one, already regularly used products prohibited in 1999 and would thus have lied on this not-consumption in competition. By six times, during the controls carried out at the end of its victorious prologue to Puy-of-Insane, July 3, 1999, and of the stages Montaigu - Challans (1st), Large-Bornand - Sestrières (9th), Sestrières - Alpe d' Huez (10th), Saint-Galmier - Saint-Flour (12th) and Castrate - Saint-Gaudens (14th), his samples are marked by the signature of this hormone of synthesis, which, by the means of an increase in the population of red globules, allows a better muscular oxygenation and a possible profit of performances that the physiologists evaluate to 30 % maximum. These analyses were carried out by the laboratory of Châtenay-Malabry, that one even which developed the process detection of the EPO. The laboratory worked, since 2004, on samples taken and frozen between 1998 and 1999, one time when the use of the EPO was current currency in the group. The scientists aimed to improve their methods of detection, and not to try to control the urines of the runners afterwards several years.


Controls which are not
On the whole, twelve samples were analyzed by the famous laboratory to this end exclusively experimental, six of them were the property of Texan, six of not identified runners. For proof, the newspaper publishes the verbal lawsuits of control of Armstrong Lance on which appear of the numbers corresponding to the positive samples.

" Until proof of the opposite, no control antidopage practised on the person of the American appeared positive since the Turn 2000. And this business should not paradoxically have any disciplinary continuation ", underlines nevertheless the sporting daily newspaper, making the point that it was not a question of taking sanctions. The conditions under which positive controls of these samples were revealed do not make it possible indeed the UCI to take sanctions. But, the business could however not remain without continuation. The World Agency Antidopage studies the possibility of possible indeed resort legal. This same file could also land between the hands of during American of the AMA, the USADA, which proved reliable in the Balco business by sanctioning athletes who had not been controlled beforehand positive. Even if these different possibiltés from recourse does not succeed, these revelations terribly tarnish nevertheless the image of Armstrong Lance and sow at the same time the doubt in the spirits concerning its six other victories.


Armstrong always denied and still denies to have been doped
The lawyer of the runner, Me Donald Manasse, contacted by the daily newspaper, indicated that it had been able to briefly discuss with Lance Armstrong, currently in the United States, but that this one did not wish to make "hot " comment without " have been able to examine what is known as in the newspaper ". Its reaction finally did not delay and the principal interested one chose its Internet site to be expressed.

The American did not change a iota his speech, repeating with the envi his innonence. " Once again, a European newspaper reports that I was controlled positive with drugs supporting the performance. Alas, hunting for the continuous witch and the article of tomorrow (this Tuesday) are nothing other than journalism with scandal. The newspaper admits even in its own article that the scientific method in question here is failing and that I do not have any means of defending me. They say: there will be thus no counter-evaluation nor lawful continuations, in a strict sense, since the rights of defense cannot be respected. I will répèterai simply what I said on several occasions: I never took drugs supporting the performance. "

After its victorious fight against a cancer of the testicles and its return in the group, Lance Armstrong always defended nozzle and nails used unspecified produced doping in spite of suspicions. With only one recovery, the American champion had been controlled positive, at the time of the turn 1999, but had been bleached after its the US team Postal one had produced a medical certificate showing that it had used a pomade to look after a pain with the saddle containing a prohibited corticoid.

" I would like to address a message to people who do not believe in cycling, cynical, the skeptics. I am sorry that they do not believe in the miracle, with the dream. Such an amount of worse for them ", had still exclaimed the American champion at the end of the last stage on the Elysées Fields in Paris, July 24, before taking its sporting retirement. Business to be followed.

[HomerJSimpson]

If the test is legit and can be trusted, it shows that he was using a banned substance when he won his first Tour. Even if it was related to his cancer treatment, it's still a banned performance enhancer in his system -- one that was suspected to be widely in use because at the time it couldn't be deteced in tests.

Besides, the ESPN story makes no reference to the drug being tied to his treatment.


I'm connecting because 1) we know nothing about this test, 2) how long EPO would be tested in the system using the test, and 3) Armstrong has already said he used EPO during rehab. *IF* in your statement is the big question.

Look, I'm not a big Armstrong aplologist. I could care less if he was smoking crack while riding his bike on tires made of dead baby skins. This story doesn't pass the sniff test at all.

[Fidatelo]

I find ESPN's coverage of this story pretty brutal as well. If this were Bonds being mentioned, even pre-BALCO, it would have at least had a headline of "Bonds accused of 'roids" or something straight up.

I attribute the difference to a few factors:
1) France v America. This is the #1 reason the US media will defend Armstrong to the death.
2) Bonds is a jerk, Armstrong is a cancer survivor.
3) Bonds is black, Armstrong is white.

[vtbub]

I published the article on the blog.

[Kodos]

1) France v America. This is the #1 reason the US media will defend Armstrong to the death.
2) Bonds is a jerk, Armstrong is a cancer survivor.
3) Bonds is black, Armstrong is white.

I was with you on the first two...

[Pumpy Tudors]

GIT YR POPCORN RDY

[sachmo71]

TOUR DE LANCE!!!!!

[terpkristin]

I must say, I'm a Lance fan, but even if I weren't, as a scientist, I'd have problems believing it.

A) They're doing guilt by association. The BBC article I read said, "The paper said there were "characteristic, undeniable and consequent" signs of EPO in what it claimed were Armstrong's urine tests, carried out by France's national anti-doping laboratory in Chatenay-Malabry. The laboratory said in a statement that it had "conducted EPO tests on samples from the 1998 and 1999 Tour de France races".

But it said it could not confirm that any tests it had conducted belonged to Armstrong." (courtesy http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/other_sports/cycling/4175650.stm)


B) He's been tested over and over nd ome up negative.


C) This is SO FAR after the fact that it seems ludacris to bring it up now except to fight his image.


D) The BBC article also notes that, "Tests on the samples were carried out in 2004 because cycling's governing body did not start using a urine test for EPO until 2001, the paper said." SO. The TdF testing group held on to the samples for 5 years before testing?!?! Who's to say ANY of the samples hasn't been contaminated some how in an effort to smear Armstrong or any other cyclist?


E) If this testing was done in 2004, why not mention it THEN as "credible proof" (albeit wooly in my scientific opinion) of his alleged doping activities? Why hold onto it through 2005's TdF? Lord knows the French have allegated that Lance has done this for a long time, I think they'd lust for "proof."


F) As far as Bonds or any other athlete involved in denying taking performance enhancing drugs and actual testing for said drugs, well, for me, the proof is in the pudding, as it were. Bonds, as far as I know (and I admit I don't know much) hasn't been tested, yet categorically denies it. Palmiero denied taking them, but tested positive. It seems that of all these, Lance has the complete package, having been tested more times than most other athletes and testing negative AND denying taking performance enhancers. It's one thing to deny taking these things. It's another to be tested. And it's wholly another to test negative. Lance has all three, which as far as I know, no other athlete tied to performance enhancing drugs has.


Maybe I'm just being optimistic here, but I find the entire thing wooly, particularly in the age of the sample (and unknown contamination, because I *WOULDN'T* put it past people to contaminate it, even if it was thought to be secure), the lateness of the publication of the result, and the lack of credibility admitted by the study authors.


/tk

[gottimd]

Maybe Lance Armstrong is a Werewolf?

[sterlingice]

If a French Football team came over and won the Super Bowl 7 times in a row Sorry, I can't get pas the "French Football team" part without breaking into a fit of laughter ;)

Maybe he took EPO with Emo while listening to ELO? Genius :D

SI

[maximus]

i wish the French were this devoted to stopping terrorsim instead OF A FUCKING BIKE RACE.

the French are big pussys. They can't help it.

[JonInMiddleGA]

the French are big pussys. They can't help it.

It's the generations worth of practice.

[Subby]

i wish the French were this devoted to stopping terrorsim instead OF A FUCKING BIKE RACE.
I got this far and thought to myself...."this kid has potential"

GOLD!

[gottimd]

http://www.naturalmatter.co.uk/BS-EPO.jpg

and

http://www.bobandtom.com/gen3/8cover_img/emo_phillips.jpg

and

http://www.raw-tcsd.com/images/ELO.JP.340.jpg

[ISiddiqui]

the French are big pussys. They can't help it.
So... um, when was the last terrorist attack in France ;).

IIRC, the French have anti-terrorism laws that make Britain's new laws look like bleeding heart liberalism.

[maximus]

So... um, when was the last terrorist attack in France ;).

IIRC, the French have anti-terrorism laws that make Britain's new laws look like bleeding heart liberalism.

BO doesn't count as "anti-terrorism". Or does it?

[Dutch]

i wish the French were this devoted to stopping terrorsim instead OF A FUCKING BIKE RACE.

QOTM!!

[Dutch]

I wonder if Antmeister can drum up some sort of Lyrics for the official Lance Apology to the people of France?

[maximus]

I wonder if Antmeister can drum up some sort of Lyrics for the official Lance Apology to the people of France?


Lance has nothing to apologize for.

[Crapshoot]

Sorry, I can't get pas the "French Football team" part without breaking into a fit of laughter ;)

Genius :D

SI

Hell, the French Football team did win the world cup this century (last 100 years - not this century... ;), something that is probably not likely for the Americans anytime soon.... :D

[AlexB]

The other thing that's being reported over here is that the supposedly positive sample is from Stage 1, but they didn't find a positive test from the Prologue sample which he would have had to give as he won the Prologue that year.

So are we expected to believe that he was negative for the Prologue and then doped himself up when he knew that he would be under scrutiny as Tour leader? Why would he need to after only one short stint, prior to a stage he had next to no chance of winning as the first few stages are all set up for the sprinters?

The French have always looked for a reason to discredit Armstrong, as he has won after a prolonged period of French riders failing to win the Tour, and wasn't helped when the (Cofidis?) team, including Virenque and Brochard amongst other French favourites was busted for drugs.

I am not necessarily an Armstrong fan, but I give this very little credence

[maximus]

Hell, the French Football team did win the world cup this century, something that is probably not likely for the Americans anytime soon.... :D


Thats because the French are doing steriods.

[sterlingice]

Hell, the French Football team did win the world cup this century (last 100 years - not this century... ;), something that is probably not likely for the Americans anytime soon.... :D
When we refer to football on this board, it's not soccer ;)

SI

[Critch]

He's obviously on something strong to be hanging around with that Sheryl Crow woofer.

[WSUCougar]

Oh yeah?!? Well...Charles de Gaulle took sphincter-enhancing drugs! I've the got the proof right here!

Somewhere.

[rkmsuf]

Oh yeah?!? Well...Charles de Gaulle took sphincter-enhancing drugs! I've the got the proof right here!

Somewhere.

His buddies called him Charles de Baulle.

[primelord]

I find ESPN's coverage of this story pretty brutal as well. If this were Bonds being mentioned, even pre-BALCO, it would have at least had a headline of "Bonds accused of 'roids" or something straight up.

I attribute the difference to a few factors:
1) France v America. This is the #1 reason the US media will defend Armstrong to the death.
2) Bonds is a jerk, Armstrong is a cancer survivor.
3) Bonds is black, Armstrong is white.
That's just silly. I guess it is possible that 1 and 2 may play some small part in this, but the main reason it's not as big of a story as Bonds is because the American popluation doesn't care anywhere near as much about Armstrong and the TdF as they do about Bonds and baseball.

Bonds was/is the biggest star playing in "The American Pastime". The American public is far mor einterested in baseball than they are in bicycle racing and ESPN treats the story accordingly.

[Fidatelo]

I'm not saying it should have more coverage, I'm saying the coverage is totally slanted towards Armstrong, whereas with Bonds it was slanted against him right from the beginning.

Now get this straight: I hate Barry Bonds. I hope he gets exposed, suspended, or otherwise ruined by his obvious steroid use at some point. I just think it's obvious that the american media is handling Armstrong (who has had whispers of drug use for years now) so much differently than Bonds.

[Eaglesfan27]

What is EPO? Can it be linked to some sort of treatment for Armstrongs condition?

It is short for Epogen. It is a drug that is frequently used in cancer patients to help rebuild their red blood cell counts after various procedures. I don't know the half-life off the top of my head. So, I'm not sure if it should have still been in his blood at that time point from his previous cancer treatment.

It certainly does have the potential to boost performance, as it increases red blood cells which can thereby increase oxygen capacity. Interestingly, I've heard of athletes in the past taking out there own blood, training hard with a diminished blood count, and then reinjecting their own blood to attempt to achieve the same effect. Of course, there are risks to that.

[korme]

that was that bad French basketball player the Knicks drafted about 4 or 5 years ago, who took him instead of Ron Artest.

he wound up getting dunked on by Vince Carter in the Olympics i think.
Frederic Weis

[Maple Leafs]

Bonds was/is the biggest star playing in "The American Pastime". The American public is far mor einterested in baseball than they are in bicycle racing and ESPN treats the story accordingly.
Do you really think Bonds is a significantly bigger star in America than Armstrong? That the average soccer mom knows more about Bonds and what he's done than Armstrong?

[rkmsuf]

Do you really think Bonds is a significantly bigger star in America than Armstrong? That the average soccer mom knows more about Bonds and what he's done than Armstrong?

I would say overall yes.


I like me some soccer moms.

[Glengoyne]

I always thought that Lance had ONE time tested positive for something, I did think it was EPO or at least some other hemoglobin/oxegen in the bloodstream enhancing drug. That result was declared to be a result of the effects of his treatment. I'm wondering if this is the same thing? I believe the result came before his first Tour win, and was resolved before the race started.

The thing that this doesn't jive with was that they didn't have a test for EPO back in 99. That means he had to have had a false positive to some other EPO like substance back in '99. I don't know if that existed at the time.

[fantastic flying froggies]

amazing how quickly this thread turned into a french bashing thread...

[gstelmack]

amazing how quickly this thread turned into a french bashing thread...
Considering how long the French have been bashing Lance (including the article that started the thread), I think it's only fair...

[JonInMiddleGA]

Not really all that amazing, considering the topic looks to be based on nothing more than American bashing by a whiny French newspaper.

[fantastic flying froggies]

my point exactly.

Anything coming out of France is shit and not worth even considering, right?

[rkmsuf]

my point exactly.

Anything coming out of France is shit and not worth even considering, right?

you make tremendous fries.

[fantastic flying froggies]

you make tremendous fries.
you mean Liberty fries ? ;)

and those aren't really french, they actually come from Belgium...

[JonInMiddleGA]

Anything coming out of France is shit and not worth even considering, right?

Let's just say that this instance appears to be from a highly questionable source (and I'm trying hard to be kind).

[Raiders Army]

you make tremendous fries.
I also like their bread pizza. Had it last night, in fact.

[rkmsuf]

the kissing thing can be good at times as well.

[Raiders Army]

touche

[rkmsuf]

the tickler?

[rkmsuf]

salad dressing? the french got it going on.

[fantastic flying froggies]

Let's just say that this instance appears to be from a highly questionable source (and I'm trying hard to be kind).
Sorry, I don't buy that. L'Equipe is the #1 sports newspaper here in France and is not a questionable source. I'm not saying the article is right and there is indeed proof, but the newspaper is a reliable one, not a tabloid in any way and I'm sure they thought long and hard before running that story.

For you guys, the equivalent would be ESPN breaking the story.

[terpkristin]

you mean Liberty fries ? ;)

and those aren't really french, they actually come from Belgium...
Freedom Fries... :D

Sadly, I know that they came from Belgium...I watched a thing about them on the Food Network (this is what I do with all the free time in the world...).

Alas, regarding the ACTUAL story here I think I made my point in post 50 (I think it was there or around there, then). I think this is all bogus, just more sour grapes (grapes that SHOULD have been used in a fine wine/whine!).

/tk

[JonInMiddleGA]

For you guys, the equivalent would be ESPN breaking the story.

... about an event which their parent company sponsored AND breaking a story that appears to be of benefit to said parent/event.

If you think that wouldn't draw fire pretty quickly, I believe you're overestimating how much we think of DisneyCorp.

[Plundun]

I find it hard to believe that Lance haven't used EPO, or any other illegal supplements. Over the years he and US Postal/discovery have beat teams and individuals that has been caught cheating. As much as I admire his achievements, I think there is no way he could maintain a seven-peat against confirmed cheaters.

[sabotai]

For you guys, the equivalent would be ESPN breaking the story.
You're not helping your case by comparing them to ESPN. ;)

[Maple Leafs]

... about an event which their parent company sponsored AND breaking a story that appears to be of benefit to said parent/event.How does this help their parent company?

Would having the biggest star of your event, and the guy who's dominated it for almost a decade, turn out to be a fraud really be "good news" for the Tour, even if many fans don't like the guy?

[terpkristin]

FYI, I made a blog post over at my blog about this, too, where I expanded on my entry here. http://gimpygal.blogspot.com/2005/08/armstrong-lied.html

/tk

[ISiddiqui]

Freedom Fries... :D

Sadly, I know that they came from Belgium...I watched a thing about them on the Food Network (this is what I do with all the free time in the world...).
Ah, but Belgium waffles originally came from France so it all balances out in the end :D.

[JonInMiddleGA]

How does this help their parent company?

Would having the biggest star of your event, and the guy who's dominated it for almost a decade, turn out to be a fraud really be "good news" for the Tour, even if many fans don't like the guy?

I believe it would, now that he's no longer competing.

By diminishing Armstrong, you diminish the impact of his loss to the TdF.
And no matter how much they might be loathe to admit it, there is a fairly sizable population in the U.S. ... a population that has certain benefits when it comes to both the Tour & cycling in general, especially in terms of marketing.

How long will all those dollars stick around if the U.S. general population returns the Tour to a profile somewhere behind women's exhibition figure skating? Not past existing contracts in some cases seems like a fair bet.
But trashing Armstrong doesn't fix that problem, short of finding an equally marketable replacement.

What trashing Armstrong can do is warm the cockles of all the Lance-haters and bring them back to the fold, especially if you can crown a Euro winner. Doing that opens the door to additional dollars (erm, Euros) from replacement sponsors across the continent.

[Maple Leafs]

I just don't see it. That's like arguing that it would have been good business sense for the NBA to bury Jordan on his way out, or for the NHL to invent some scandal over Gretzky when he retired.

[vtbub]

I just don't see it. That's like arguing that it would have been good business sense for the NBA to bury Jordan on his way out, or for the NHL to invent some scandal over Gretzky when he retired.

Jordan and Gretzky are beloved figures. From what I've read, that's not the case with Armstrong. None of us have been too kind to Jose Canseco or Roger Clemens, and I think the analogy is closer to that.

The whole thing reeks of a WWE style stunt, but considering that it's a national pride thing in France as supposed to a digital cable treat in this country. This seems like an act of jealousy, or the tip of a very big iceberg.

[HomerJSimpson]

I just don't see it. That's like arguing that it would have been good business sense for the NBA to bury Jordan on his way out, or for the NHL to invent some scandal over Gretzky when he retired.


I think Jon is wrong about this reaching out to the US market. Thi is just old fashion jealousy and the fact many in that country would do anything to bury Armstrong.

And with that comment, I'm leaving this thread, because honestly I could care less.

[JonInMiddleGA]

I think Jon is wrong about this reaching out to the US market.

Just FTR, that's kinda backwards to what I was saying -- this is about knowing the US interest & involvement are going to drop & reaching out to Euros.

[Airhog]

Erythropoietin
updated Feb 2005
Pharmacological cheating in sports is not a new phenomenon. Unfortunately, the modern era has witnessed explosive growth in new and different ways to achieve false victory. Advances in biochemistry, medicine, and other fields have benefited humanity in countless ways. Sadly, however, some have abused these advances for, “pursuit of victory at all cost”. A recent article by Dr. Timothy Noakes (1) highlights the breadth and depth of the problem. He discusses several “cheating venues”, but for this article I wish to focus on one, erythropoietin.


Erythropoietin (pronounced, ah-rith-ro-poy-tin, and abbreviated, EPO) is a relatively recent entry into the deceitful pursuit of glory. EPO is a protein hormone produced by the kidney. After being released into the blood stream it binds with receptors in the bone marrow, where it stimulates the production of red blood cells (erythrocytes). Medically, EPO is used to treat certain forms of anemia (e.g., due to chronic kidney failure). Logically, since EPO accelerates erythrocyte production it also increases oxygen carrying capacity. This fact did not long escape notice of the athletic community.

Blood doping is the process of artificially increasing the amount of red blood cells in the body in an attempt to improve athletic performance. In the past this was accomplished by transfusion. The athlete would “donate” a unit of blood into storage and then 3 weeks later, after the body had completely replaced the blood loss, transfuse the unit back into the body. This would occur just before a big race, effectively giving the athlete an “extra” unit of blood. This enables performance improvements in endurance sports because of the extra oxygen carrying capacity. The practice has been outlawed. Not just because it is unfair but because of the dangers involved.

EPO has put a whole new spin on blood doping. No need for messy transfusions, just shoot up with EPO to increase your circulating erythrocyte mass. Until recently accurate testing has been difficult because the recombinant human EPO made in the lab is virtually identical to the naturally occurring form and there are no firmly established normal ranges for EPO in the body. The only previously available route to curtail cheating for sports governing bodies was to ban an athlete if the hematocrit (see side bar) level was too high (e.g., above 50%). Thus, over the past 10 – 15 years some athletes chose to cheat because, as long as they kept their hematocrit levels below 50%, there seemed little risk of getting caught. Of course the other way to get caught was highlighted in the disastrous 1998 Tour de France. Several team doctors and personnel from several teams were caught red-handed with thousands of doses of EPO and other banned substances. Ultimately about 50% of the teams withdrew from the race – either for cheating or in protest.

Fortunately, testing technology has now caught up and promises to stem the tide of abuse. There is now an accurate urine test that can detect the differences between normal and synthetic EPO. This test is now the standard and was the sole means to detect for EPO use in the 2004 Athens Olympic Games. The reliability of this test helps explain the cascade of athletes who have been caught and, subsequently, banned from competition. This surge in positive tests will likely decline as the “word” gets out and EPO use declines -- at least until someone figures out a work-around. Of course, there is always the next great pharmacologic or genetic cheat just lurking around the corner to consider.

Ref(1) – Tainted Glory – Doping and Athletic Performance. Noakes, TD. NEJM. 351:9. Aug.26. 2004

Why is EPO dangerous?
The reason that EPO, and transfusion blood doping, is dangerous is because of increased blood viscosity. Basically, whole blood consists of red blood cells and plasma (water, proteins, etc.). The percentage of whole blood that is occupied by the red blood cells is referred to as, the hematocrit. A low hematocrit means dilute (thin) blood, and a high hematocrit mean concentrated (thick) blood. Above a certain hematocrit level whole blood can sludge and clog capillaries. If this happens in the brain it results in a stroke. In the heart, a heart attack. Unfortunately, this has happened to several elite athletes who have used EPO.

EPO use is especially dangerous to athletes who exercise over prolonged periods. A well-conditioned endurance athlete is more dehydration resistant than a sedentary individual. The body accomplishes this by several methods, but one key component is to “hold on” to more water at rest. Circulating whole blood is one location in which this occurs and, thus, can function as a water reservoir. During demanding exercise, as fluid losses mount, water is shifted out of the blood stream (hematocrit rises). If one is already starting with an artificially elevated hematocrit then you can begin to see the problem -- it is a short trip to the critical “sludge zone”.

Additional dangers of EPO include sudden death during sleep, which has killed approximately 18 pro cyclists in the past fifteen years, and the development of antibodies directed against EPO. In this later circumstance the individual develops anemia as a result of the body’s reaction against repeated EPO injections.

[gstelmack]

I find it hard to believe that Lance haven't used EPO, or any other illegal supplements. Over the years he and US Postal/discovery have beat teams and individuals that has been caught cheating. As much as I admire his achievements, I think there is no way he could maintain a seven-peat against confirmed cheaters.
Well, if those opponents were anything like the mess of third-string baseballers getting caught with steroids, maybe it's not such a stretch...

[JeffNights]

From what I read and hear, the science behind this test has already been disproved and discredited. Just some "investigative reporter" wants to make a big name for himself by spooling together some bullshit.

Oh and by the way, in '99 so what if he tests positive for EPO? ITS A WIDELY USED TREATMENT FOR CANCER PATIENTS ASSHOLES. Do you really think the supposed "gains" of EPO overmatch the debiltiating effects of brain and testicular cancer have on the human body? get a fucking clue.

FUCKING Frogs, this story seems to want to set aside the hundreds of tests he passed since this so called failed test. Yeah that EPO in '99 really helped him in the mountain stages this year....Its ok though, the French just being the bunch of whining little bitches that they are.

The guy brought more media sponsorship to the event in record numbers than ever before, and the head of the TDF rails on him too. LOL. what a buncha sore losers. its not like FRANCE hasnt ever LOST ANYTHING BEFORE.

[Huckleberry]

http://www.velonews.com/news/fea/8746.0.html

[Vinatieri for Prez]

I didn't have to time to read all, so my apologies up front. This case is different. Armstrong has tested clean since then yet still walked away with the Tour 6 other times. This is incredible proof that he didn't need (or they wouldn't have made a competitive difference) in 1999. The same cannot be said about other sports stars, who are proven through tests to be off the juice, etc. but keep up their performance levels.

[KeyserSoze]

1- I believe that Armstrong doped himself to win the Tour.

2- I believe that all the big cyclist has doped (at least in the last 20 years) including Indurain.

3. I believe that if the name of Lance Armstrong was instead Lance DePuy this article has been never published.

[Ragone]

You'll find that most americans

1. Believe Lance at some point in his career took something illegal

You'll also find that most americans

1. Don't give a flying fig about it


However.. this does seem kinda bitterish and poorly timed.. would be like a brazil newspaper printing a article now saying barthez and zidane were bulking up on roids during their world cup winning year

[jeff061]

L'Equipe is the #1 sports newspaper here in France and is not a questionable source.

For you guys, the equivalent would be ESPN breaking the story.

Well that's pretty sad commentary on the French, just strengthens those stereo types. This is the magazine that wrote this about Lance and the tour before this "scandal" broke. From a AP article.

The paper often questioned Armstrong's clean record and frequently took jabs at him — portraying him as too arrogant, too corporate and too good to be real.

"Never to such an extent, probably, has the departure of a champion been welcomed with such widespread relief," the paper griped the day after Armstrong won his seventh straight Tour win and retired from cycling.

Sorry, I don't see ESPN acting like that.

[Maple Leafs]

This case is different. Armstrong has tested clean since then yet still walked away with the Tour 6 other times. This is incredible proof that he didn't need (or they wouldn't have made a competitive difference) in 1999. That assumes that testing clean means a guy is clean. In fact, we know that the cheaters are always two or three steps ahead of the testers. Masking agents, untraceable drugs, designer steroids, etc., make it relatively easy for a motivated cheater to avoid detection. It usually takes a mistake by the cheat to get caught -- Balco was the exception because the testers got tipped off and were able to test for it before the cheaters knew they could.

All the top sprinters in the 80s tested clean over and over again. Ben Johnson tested clean plenty of times before Seoul, but he admitted he was juiced the whole time. Linford Christie tested cleans hundreds of times before he finally failed a test. Marion Jones has still never failed a test despite an almost ridiculous amount of evidence that she was a fraud. Virtually all elite-level cheaters will test cleans the overwhelming majority of the time -- it's just a question of whether they do eventually get busted or not.

And yes, I realize this puts clean atheletes in an impossible situation because they have no way to prove that they're clean. That's unfair, but it's the reality.

[Blackadar]

What a crock of shit.

[Kodos]

my point exactly.

Anything coming out of France is shit and not worth even considering, right?

French Maids rock the house. Nice job, Pierre.*






* Ripped off from beer commercial

"It's hard to respect the French when you have to bail them out of two big ones in one century. But we have to hand it to them on mayonnaise. Nice job, Pierre."

[HomerJSimpson]

I know I said I was out, but just for info purposes:

Drudge top headline: TOUR CHIEF: ARMSTRONG 'FOOLED' WORLD

[rkmsuf]

We were duped!

[cartman]

I know I said I was out, but just for info purposes:

Drudge top headline: TOUR CHIEF: ARMSTRONG 'FOOLED' WORLD

you left out the most important part: developing...

:D

[Samdari]

Summary:

Is it likely that Armstrong was on EPO, which enhanced performance, but could not be tested for in 1999, used EPO during the 1999 TdF? Yes.

Is it likely that this gave him a competitive advantage? No (because if there is a performance enhancing substance that cannot be tested for, EVERY cyclist is on it, guaranteed).

Is there any chance that this test, on a urine sample stored for 6 years in a country where every single one of its citizens wants the provider of said sample to have used drugs, is legitimate? No.

[Crapshoot]

From what I read and hear, the science behind this test has already been disproved and discredited. Just some "investigative reporter" wants to make a big name for himself by spooling together some bullshit.

Oh and by the way, in '99 so what if he tests positive for EPO? ITS A WIDELY USED TREATMENT FOR CANCER PATIENTS ASSHOLES. Do you really think the supposed "gains" of EPO overmatch the debiltiating effects of brain and testicular cancer have on the human body? get a fucking clue.

FUCKING Frogs, this story seems to want to set aside the hundreds of tests he passed since this so called failed test. Yeah that EPO in '99 really helped him in the mountain stages this year....Its ok though, the French just being the bunch of whining little bitches that they are.

The guy brought more media sponsorship to the event in record numbers than ever before, and the head of the TDF rails on him too. LOL. what a buncha sore losers. its not like FRANCE hasnt ever LOST ANYTHING BEFORE.


This is all of France now ? Idiotic slurs don't make an arguement.

[NoMyths]

Which is worse:

A) Lance Armstrong being falsely accused by a magazine for doping

or

B) Immoderately slurring an entire nation of people--many of whom probably are profoundly uninterested in Lance Armstrong's travails--based on the actions of a relatively minute amount of loud accusers?

---

I mean, really. Regardless of whether Armstrong did or didn't dope, all this nationalist B.S. is idiocy of the highest order. Perhaps y'all should begin campaigning to send the Statue of Liberty back home next.

[Surtt]

I'd like to know who the other 14 riders that tested positive were.

[JonInMiddleGA]

I mean, really. Regardless of whether Armstrong did or didn't dope, all this nationalist B.S. is idiocy of the highest order.

You seem to be making the faulty assumption that the disdain is being generated in a vacuum of some sort, that what you're referring to is just about Lance & this article.

That would be, as I'm sure you know, a baaaaaad assumption.

[NoMyths]

You seem to be making the faulty assumption that the disdain is being generated in a vacuum of some sort, that what you're referring to is just about Lance & this article.

That would be, as I'm sure you know, a baaaaaad assumption.No, I'm fully aware of the context for the anti-France sentiment around here (and elsewhere). It's still idiotic to paint everyone in a country by the same brush.

[JonInMiddleGA]

It's still idiotic to paint everyone in a country by the same brush.

Not when the odds appear to be in favor of painting with the right color, then it's a simple matter of practicality.

Trying to do an individual analysis of every resident of most any nation seems like more of a fool's errand to me ... especially since 99.9999% of them are incredibly irrelevant to your entire life in any way. The fractional percent that actually matter? Fine, assess them on an individual basis, but beyond that it seems to be a major waste of time & energy.

[NoMyths]

Not when the odds appear to be in favor of painting with the right color, then it's a simple matter of practicality.

Trying to do an individual analysis of every resident of most any nation seems like more of a fool's errand to me ... especially since 99.9999% of them are incredibly irrelevant to your entire life in any way. The fractional percent that actually matter? Fine, assess them on an individual basis, but beyond that it seems to be a major waste of time & energy.An individual analysis is unnecessary...but an acknowledgment that the political and cultural positions taken by even a large majority in a country probably do not represent the views of everyone in that nation is very necessary. Being French doesn't suddenly make one hate American bike riders and military conflicts, despite the current anti-French party line. Nor does being American suddenly make one a gun-carrying war-monger, which tends to be the perception overseas.

[NoMyths]

dola...

The danger of such nationalist rhetoric, of course, is that it eliminates the possibility of trying to understand where other folks are coming from, and thus eliminates the possibility of any outcome but a violent confrontation.

[JonInMiddleGA]

An individual analysis is unnecessary...but an acknowledgment that the political and cultural positions taken by even a large majority in a country probably do not represent the views of everyone in that nation is very necessary.

NM, do you really believe that any substantial number of people don't/wouldn't acknowledge that there are exceptions to most general rules? (where general characteristics are concered I mean, because right/wrong behaviors is a whole diff. subject).

Hell NM, I'm probably among the most consistently hard-line people you know, but I'd be pretty surprised if you said you didn't believe that I make that sort of allowance.

It doesn't have to be spelled out in great detail in every conversation or situation in order to exist.

[JonInMiddleGA]

The danger of such nationalist rhetoric, of course, is that it eliminates the possibility of trying to understand where other folks are coming from, and thus eliminates the possibility of any outcome but a violent confrontation.

You say that like it's a bad thing ;)

[Anthony]

i personally don't think Lance Armstrong did any drugs to win the tours. the French aren't good at riding bikes, they should just leave it at that.

[Solecismic]

If this bizarre version of ESPN, which essentially runs the Tour and has a long-standing open dislike of Armstrong, is the only source of proof of this accusation, it sounds remarkably like Dan Rather and the infamous documents that led to the downfall of CBS News.

I understand why they're doing it. Probably, Armstrong's dominance has led to an overall lowering of popularity for the Tour de France. Most people still don't care about it in America, and it has to be frustrating to many French people that their race has been dominated by an American.

But the accusation is suspect. That's what happens when you allow your organization to take sides like that.

[NoMyths]

NM, do you really believe that any substantial number of people don't/wouldn't acknowledge that there are exceptions to most general rules? (where general characteristics are concered I mean, because right/wrong behaviors is a whole diff. subject).In most cases? Until their beliefs are challenged in some way, yes, many folks are comfortable believing and saying plenty of nationalist/racist/sexist rhetoric. I was shocked when people took that "Freedom Fries" garbage seriously (our minor-league ballpark--affiliated with the Yankees now, natch) still serves them. Not to much of an exception there.

Hell NM, I'm probably among the most consistently hard-line people you know, but I'd be pretty surprised if you said you didn't believe that I make that sort of allowance.

It doesn't have to be spelled out in great detail in every conversation or situation in order to exist.I would hope that was the case, but I've seen little evidence of such allowance from most folks who behave in those ways. While every conversation doesn't need it spelled out, "FUCKING Frogs" doesn't belong in any of them.

[JonInMiddleGA]

I was shocked when people took that "Freedom Fries" garbage seriously (our minor-league ballpark--affiliated with the Yankees now, natch) still serves them. Not to much of an exception there.

And your "garbage" is actually one of my more favorite moments of the past decade. It illustrated the collective disdain of a collective group.

"FUCKING Frogs" doesn't belong in any of them.

I disagree wholeheartedly, in so long as it's use matches its intent.

And I'll even go so far as to offer a possible test for the use of
"Fuck {insert target group here}"

If you mean that you would accept the loss of the good whatevers in order to rid the your life/the world of the bad whatevers, then I believe the phrase is well-chosen.

Disagree with it all you want, but I don't think it's an unreasonable test (for the use of the phrase). With the exception of generally obvious flippant usage, if you hear me say "Fuck so-and-so", that's a good sign that I've at least subconsciously applied that very guideline.

Now, as long as you don't ask me whether I believe a majority of usages are actually thought through that far, I should be pretty much good-to-go here.
:)

[Dutch]

I will be visiting France in a couple of years. I'm going to Paris on one trip for my 10th annivesary. And to the Normandy Beaches on another to see where so many Americans and British died 60 years ago.

I'll report back if the stereotype of French people being mean based on nationalistic values is true or not. :)

[Blackadar]

And your "garbage" is actually one of my more favorite moments of the past decade. It illustrated the collective disdain of a collective group.



I disagree wholeheartedly, in so long as it's use matches its intent.

And I'll even go so far as to offer a possible test for the use of
"Fuck {insert target group here}"

If you mean that you would accept the loss of the good whatevers in order to rid the your life/the world of the bad whatevers, then I believe the phrase is well-chosen.

Disagree with it all you want, but I don't think it's an unreasonable test (for the use of the phrase). With the exception of generally obvious flippant usage, if you hear me say "Fuck so-and-so", that's a good sign that I've at least subconsciously applied that very guideline.

Now, as long as you don't ask me whether I believe a majority of usages are actually thought through that far, I should be pretty much good-to-go here.
:)

So "fucking ignorant jackbooted rednecks named Jon in Middle GA" is ok then?

:p

[Samdari]

So "fucking ignorant jackbooted rednecks named Jon in Middle GA" is ok then?

:p

I believe you have just defined "obviously flippant usage"*

*Note the correct use of quotation marks to indicate an actual quote.

[Blackadar]

I believe you have just defined "obviously flippant usage"*

*Note the correct use of quotation marks to indicate an actual quote.

Gracias.

[Schmidty]

LOUD NOISES!!!!!!!!

[JonInMiddleGA]

So "fucking ignorant jackbooted rednecks named Jon in Middle GA" is ok then?

:p

If you mean it I really don't see a problem with you saying it, you fucking worthless posterchild for the use of retroactive abortion.

[Blackadar]

If you mean it I really don't see a problem with you saying it, you fucking worthless posterchild for the use of retroactive abortion.

Ya, but then your Mom couldn't have had you.

Son!

:D

http://www.planetsmilies.com/smilies/fighting/fighting0061.gif

[JeffNights]

I base my opinion of the French through the interactions i have had with them. Each time they are snotty, lazy and a buncha pussies. In several Joint Training Operations, I came away with the opinion that the only French unit worth a shit was the FFL. Wonder why? Oh yeah, half the unit isnt French at all!

[fantastic flying froggies]

I base my opinion of the French through the interactions i have had with them. Each time they are snotty, lazy and a buncha pussies. In several Joint Training Operations, I came away with the opinion that the only French unit worth a shit was the FFL. Wonder why? Oh yeah, half the unit isnt French at all!
Well, basing my opinion of you on my interaction I'm having with you currently, I think you're an arrogant and ignorant asshole.

[FrogMan]

Well, basing my opinion of you on my interaction I'm having with you currently, I think you're an arrogant and ignorant asshole.
actually FFF, if you use his logic, based on the interaction you're having with him, you should conclude that all residents of his nation (USA in this case) are arrogant and ignorant assholes... :rolleyes:

FM

[Johnny93g]

Well, basing my opinion of you on my interaction I'm having with you currently, I think you're an arrogant and ignorant asshole.

Agreed, i think its possible to make a good arguement, and defend your beliefs without making racist comments

[terpkristin]

Getting back on topic here...from Yahoo News, at http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20050825/ap_on_sp_ot/cyc_armstrong_doping;_ylt=AnheF6yTKpLwNJmj83V6iLKs0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTA3cm82NXAwBHNlYwM3NTU-


Armstrong Rips Tour Chief, French Paper

<!-- END HEADLINE --> <!-- BEGIN STORY BODY --> By JIM LITKE, AP Sports Writer1 hour, 12 minutes ago


Lance Armstrong climbed down off his bike a month ago. His counterattacking skills, though, remain as sharp as ever. A day after the director of the Tour de France said the seven-time champion "fooled" race officials and the sporting world by doping, Armstrong responded to the growing controversy with harsh words for everyone connected to a report in L'Equipe, the French sports daily that made the original accusation.

"Where to start?" Armstrong mused during a conference call Wednesday from Washington. "This has been a long, love-hate relationship between myself and the French."

He went on to lambaste L'Equipe and question the science and ethics of the suburban Paris laboratory that stored frozen samples from the 1999 tour, tested them only last year and leaked the results used in the newspaper's report. He even suggested officials of the Tour and sports ministries who were involved in putting the story together could wind up facing him in court.

"Right now," Armstrong said, "we're considering all our options."

But a moment later, he added, "In the meantime, it would cost a million and a half dollars and a year of my life. I have a lot better things to do with the million and a half ... a lot better things I can do with my time. Ultimately, I have to ask myself that question."

What convinced Armstrong to go on the offensive were remarks earlier Wednesday by tour director Jean-Marie Leblanc. He said L'Equipe's report that six urine samples Armstrong provided during his first tour win in 1999 tested positive for the red blood cell-booster EPO had convinced him the cyclist had cheated.

"The ball is now in his court," Leblanc told the newspaper. "Why, how, by whom? He owes explanations to us and to everyone who follows the Tour. Today, what L'Equipe revealed shows me that I was fooled. We were all fooled."

But in one sense, Armstrong felt the same way, saying he talked to Leblanc on the telephone after the tour director spoke to L'Equipe, but before those remarks were published.

"I actually spoke to him for about 30 minutes and he didn't say any of that stuff to me personally," Armstrong said. "But to say that I've 'fooled' the fans is preposterous. I've been doing this a long time. We have not just one year of only 'B' samples; we have seven years of 'A' and 'B' samples. They've all been negative."

Armstrong has insisted throughout his career that he has never taken drugs to enhance his performance. In his autobiography, "It's Not About the Bike," he said he was administered EPO during his chemotherapy treatment to battle cancer.

"It was the only thing that kept me alive," he wrote.

Armstrong questioned the validity of testing samples frozen six years ago, how those samples were handled since, and how he could be expected to defend himself when the only confirming evidence — the 'A' sample used for the 1999 tests — no longer existed. He also charged officials at the suburban Paris lab with violating World Anti-Doping Agency code for failing to safeguard the anonymity of any remaining 'B' samples it had.

"It doesn't surprise me at all that they have samples. Clearly they've tested all of my samples since then to the highest degree. But when I gave those samples," he said, referring to 1999, "there was not EPO in those samples. I guarantee that."

Two anti-doping authorities said urine samples from 1999, if stored properly, still could produce legitimate EPO test results.

"I believe they may well, if they have been properly stored — without access to outside people so they cannot be tampered with. Also in a refrigerator or deep frozen," Arne Ljungqvist, chairman of the International Olympic Committee's medical commission, said Wednesday in a phone interview with The Associated Press.

Christiane Ayotte, director of Montreal's anti-doping laboratory, said EPO can disappear from samples within a few months. But it cannot be formed in the sample over time if it was not originally there.

"I have no doubt that if the lab in Paris found EPO, it was there," she said in an e-mail interview with The Associated Press. "Let's put it differently, when recombinant (synthetic) EPO is detected, it is because it's in the sample. Time will decrease the amount of EPO, not increase or form it."

EPO, formally known as erythropoietin, was on the list of banned substances when Armstrong won his first Tour, but there was no effective test to detect the drug. But Armstrong's assurances he never took performance-enhancing drugs has been good enough for his sponsors. A previously scheduled meeting with several brought him to Washington, and he said afterward, "We haven't seen any damage."

But Armstrong acknowledged the same was likely true at L'Equipe.

"Obviously, this is great business for them," he said. "Unfortunately, I'm caught in the cross-hairs.

"And at the end of day," he added, "I think that's what it's all about ... selling newspapers. And it sells."

___

AP Sports Writers Chris Lehourites in London and Rob Gloster in New York contributed to this report.

/tk

[Honolulu_Blue]

I base my opinion of the French through the interactions i have had with them. Each time they are snotty, lazy and a buncha pussies. In several Joint Training Operations, I came away with the opinion that the only French unit worth a shit was the FFL. Wonder why? Oh yeah, half the unit isnt French at all!

I lived in Belgium for three years. I worked with many French people. I visited France many times in those three years (as one of the best parts of Brussels is that it's only 1 hour and 20 minutes by train from Paris). During my three years I found some French people to be very cool. I made some good friends. I found some French people to be assholes.

I have lived in America for the other 28 years of my life. During those 28 years I have found some American people to be very cool. I made some good friends. I have found some American people to be assholes.

The results are shocking.

[Honolulu_Blue]

Getting back on topic here...
I stand firm in my long held belief that Lance Armstrong did not, and has never, taken performance enhancing drugs. This is a witch hunt. This is crap. Lance rules. The rest of those bike riding people suck.

[jeff061]

I know one French guy, I used to work with him. Very cool, very smart guy.

But he wasn't rooting for Armstrong's failure like the majority of French do. That alone just speaks volumes about them.

[terpkristin]

I'm with you, HB.
Then again, I think my posts have been hidden by the other stuff going on here. Read my views at the blog.

/tk

[Maple Leafs]

Interesting article, which clarifies two important things that help us to understand the story:

- Armstrong strongly denies having EPO in his sample, period. He is not using the cancer treatment defense, he says the drug wasn't in his system at all.

- Improper storage of the samples would not cause a false positive for EPO. They could cause a false-negative because the traces could disappear, but not a positive. So if there's EPO in the sampe now, it's either because it was there in the original sample or because the sample was tampered with.

[Honolulu_Blue]

But he wasn't rooting for Armstrong's failure like the majority of French do. That alone just speaks volumes about them.
It does? How so? This is sports. What does rooting against the "other team" say about you other than you're a fan of "your team"? I don't get it. I am a Lions fan. I actively root for the failure of the Packers, Bears, Vikings, amongst many other a NFL franchise. What volumes does that speak about me other than "I am a Lions fan who would like to see my team succeed and the teams my team has to compete again fail"?

[rkmsuf]

I still can't figure out why this is even an issue. So what if he did take something. Sorry but doping in cycling just doesn't matter to anyone not French. Or not bored.


*Of course I could give a shit that Armstrong won 7 Tours de Frances in the first place. I'm not gaga over it like the rest of the free world.

[gstelmack]

- Improper storage of the samples would not cause a false positive for EPO. They could cause a false-negative because the traces could disappear, but not a positive. So if there's EPO in the sampe now, it's either because it was there in the original sample or because the sample was tampered with.
Lance's claim is that the science behind the test is faulty, so you can't even trust that there really IS EPO in the sample.

[Maple Leafs]

Lance's claim is that the science behind the test is faulty, so you can't even trust that there really IS EPO in the sample.But the independent experts in the article seem to refute that. Or at least, they refute the specific idea that the six year delay could have caused EPO to somehow appear (or to trigger a false positive).

If Armstrong is referring to something else, then he may have a case, but he needs to spell it out in more detail than just saying "faulty science" and leaving it at that.

[Blackadar]

But the independent experts in the article seem to refute that. Or at least, they refute the specific idea that the six year delay could have caused EPO to somehow appear (or to trigger a false positive).

If Armstrong is referring to something else, then he may have a case, but he needs to spell it out in more detail than just saying "faulty science" and leaving it at that.

Of course, the lab can't confirm the sample was Armstrong's at all anyway.

[Maple Leafs]

Of course, the lab can't confirm the sample was Armstrong's at all anyway.
Right, and even if they could they can't test the A samples anyway.

I'd like to see some more information about the link between the two photos of the ID numbers -- one on the positive test, one on Armstrong's race documents. I'd like to know how conclusive that really is, as well as if whether there's any chance the numbers were tampered with.

[Surtt]

"EPO tests on the 1999 B urine samples were not carried out until last year, when scientists performed research on them to fine-tune EPO testing methods, the paper said.

The national anti-doping laboratory in Chatenay-Malabry, which developed the EPO test and analyzed the urine samples in question, said it could not confirm that the positive EPO results were Armstrong's.

It noted that the samples were anonymous, bearing only a a six-digit number to identify the rider, and could not be matched with the name of any one cyclist. "



This whole story doesn't make any sense to me.

1. The lab was doing research to fine tune there methods. Wouldn't you use a know sample to judge how effective the methods are? Maybe they're faulty and you turn up false positives.

2. How did they happen to use the Tdf samples for research? Were they just lying around? Why not use fresher samples?

3. Who called the newspaper and why? At that point there was nothing connecting the sample to Armstrong. "Were doing research on urine sampling methodology and have some positives on an anonymous sample. ", sounds like a major story to me.

4. Would a major newspaper waist its time if it didn't already know who's sample it was? Or did they already decide who's sample it was going to be?

This sure sounds like there is more going on here then the paper is saying.

[Maple Leafs]

Good article on the subject by King Kaufman. Particularly interesting point about the conflict of interest with the newspaper (towards the end of the article)
http://www.salon.com/news/sports/col/kaufman/2005/08/25/thursday/print.html

Aug. 25, 2005 | Two things are certain in the latest doping controversy surrounding Lance Armstrong: If you believed on Monday that he was dirty for his seven-year run of Tour de France titles, you still believe it today. And if you had your doubts or were sure he's always been clean, you haven't changed your mind.

Being a sports fan in the 21st century isn't about picking what team or athlete to root for. It's about choosing whose version of reality you want to believe.

The great thing about sports, from the time of the Greeks, I suppose, has always been that they provide unambiguous results. Winners and losers. Heroes and goats. We can debate forever whether the '27 Yankees or '75 Reds were greater, Muhammad Ali or Joe Louis, Wayne Gretzky or Gordie Howe, Secretariat or Man o' War.

But there was no doubting that any of them were great champions, conquerors, the best of their time.

We've lost that.

Now all but the most naive of us meet athletic achievement with skeptical admiration at best. The greater the achievement, the greater the skepticism.

In 1988, when Kirk Gibson limped out of the dugout on two bad knees to hit a game-winning home run in Game 1 of the World Series, Jack Buck blurted an immortal line into the CBS Radio microphone: "I don't believe what I just saw!" Seventeen years later, that sentence, carrying a very different meaning, defines sports fandom.

To put it another way, a silly way, three decades ago we came out of our movie theater seats to cheer journeyman club fighter Rocky Balboa as he gave heavyweight champ Apollo Creed the fight of his life. Today we'd be intrigued, but we'd wait on the drug tests before we suspended our disbelief -- a little.

We'd still wonder, even in the absence of positive results. Many of those whose reputations have taken the biggest hit from doping accusations have never tested positive, including Marion Jones, a pariah in the track and field world, Mark McGwire and, before this week if you believe the French sporting newspaper L'Equipe, Armstrong.

I'm not saying I want to go back. I don't need to be protected from harsh reality. I believe that the truth is a beautiful thing and the seeking of it noble.

But not wanting to go back to a more innocent time doesn't mean I can't mourn for it.

I keep thinking of another famous radio call, the signature cry of Mel Allen: "How about that!" It doesn't mean I want to live with my head in the sand to mourn for a time when that was an exclamation, not a question.

So what of this latest Armstrong story? You probably know the outline by now. L'Equipe, the French sporting daily, reported Tuesday that it has "incontestable" evidence that Armstrong used EPO, a banned blood enhancer, in 1999, the year of his first Tour victory, when no test could detect it. "The extraordinary champion, the escapee from cancer, has become a legend by means of a lie," the paper wrote.

L'Equipe published the results of retests on anonymous 1999 Tour de France urine samples by the French National Anti-Doping Laboratory. The lab was retesting the samples for research purposes, but the paper says it was able to match registration numbers on six of the samples that turned up EPO with Armstrong's paperwork, which it says proves they belonged to the champion.

The samples were so-called B samples, which had been kept frozen over the years. Under cycling rules, the A and B samples must turn up positive before an athlete can be sanctioned.

Armstrong proclaimed his innocence and lashed out at Tour de France director Jean-Marie Leblanc, long an Armstrong defender, who backed the report and said, "I was fooled. We were all fooled." Armstrong called Leblanc's comment "preposterous" and pointed out again that he's never failed a drug test.

As usual, there's plenty of ambiguity to go around, on top of the ambiguity that's always come with Armstrong's success.

That is: Did he really go from just another rider in the '90s to one of the greatest in history only because of single-minded determination and a brilliant nutritional and training strategy after his recovery from cancer, or did he have some illegal help?

And despite all those negative drug tests, is it really possible that in a sport where performance enhancers were the coin of the realm -- the 1998 Tour de France was the site of the biggest sports drug bust in history at the time -- Armstrong not only won seven straight Tours, but he did so while standing nearly alone as an abstainer?

One way or the other, he's a hell of an athlete and a hell of a man, because he really did win those seven Tours. But was he just too good to be true?

The answer, of course: Maybe, maybe not.

International doping experts have been quoted disagreeing about whether EPO can survive and be detected in a sample frozen for so long, and the lab where the tests were conducted wouldn't confirm L'Equipe's report that the test in question belonged to Armstrong.

There are also chain-of-evidence questions involved when a sample is 6 years old and is being used for a purpose different from the one for which it was given.

On the other hand, L'Equipe, which is serious and respected worldwide, is owned by Amaury Sports Organisation, the same company that owns and runs the Tour de France. French anti-Lance feelings aside, if there's a conflict of interest, it points in the other direction.

Yeah, the French hate it that this Texan ran roughshod over their most famous sporting event, but he also did wonders for it. He raised its profile internationally, especially in the United States. But more important than that, he came along at a time when the Tour and the sport were one big doping story.

In 1998, the year before Armstrong started his winning streak, a traffic stop turned up 250 vials of EPO in a car belonging to the French Festina team. A few months before Armstrong's first win in the '99 Tour, cycling reporter Andrew Taber wrote in Salon that the sport of bicycle racing "may be on its deathbed."

Times have changed and Lance Armstrong changed them. If there were some corporate edict to get Lance, it would be a classic case of Amaury Sports cutting off Armstrong's nose to spite its face. I'm not aware of too many large corporations that would torpedo the reputation of one of their most important properties for patriotic reasons.

Lance Armstrong sipping champagne as he glides down the Champs-Elysées on the way to his seventh straight Tour de France crown. How about that!

How about that?

[Maple Leafs]

4. Would a major newspaper waist its time if it didn't already know who's sample it was? Or did they already decide who's sample it was going to be?
Not sure about your other points, but this one isn't hard to imagine an explanation for. There has been speculation for years that Armstrong was doping, so there's not much question that they knew what they were looking for. It's not much different than if ESPN found out that there were leftover drug tests that indicated that someone on the 2001 Giants has failed a steroid test -- you don't think they'd dig further to see if they could nail Bonds? If it is him, they have a major story. If not, they probably don't bother with it.

[Abe Sargent]

Not sure about your other points, but this one isn't hard to imagine an explanation for. There has been speculation for years that Armstrong was doping, so there's not much question that they knew what they were looking for. It's not much different than if ESPN found out that there were leftover drug tests that indicated that someone on the 2001 Giants has failed a steroid test -- you don't think they'd dig further to see if they could nail Bonds? If it is him, they have a major story. If not, they probably don't bother with it.


Aren't their hundreds of cyclists in a Tour? Isn't it more akin to being told that someone in the AFC was busted for steroids, but we don't know who?


-Anxiety

[Abe Sargent]

Dola -

Actually, I was on the phone with my gf who lived in France for a while, and she said that although th French really care about the TdF, their level of interest in things cycling is really about the level of their fifth or sixth most popular sport. If her recollection is correct, than this is more analagous to someone calling up ESPN and saying that there was a random NHL sample that turned up oistive and asking if they want to pursue it.

-Anxiety

[fantastic flying froggies]

Very good article, Maple Leafs. It put things in perspective a bit.

Anxiety, your girlfriend is wrong about the importance of the Tour de France in France. While it is true that cycling in general is not that big a deal, the Tour is one of the top 2 or 3 sporting events each year.
Also, for info, there are 180 riders in the TdF.

[illinifan999]

I find ESPN's coverage of this story pretty brutal as well. If this were Bonds being mentioned, even pre-BALCO, it would have at least had a headline of "Bonds accused of 'roids" or something straight up.

I attribute the difference to a few factors:
1) France v America. This is the #1 reason the US media will defend Armstrong to the death.
2) Bonds is a jerk, Armstrong is a cancer survivor.
3) Bonds is black, Armstrong is white.
If Armstrong was black he could just say the French were racists. But since he's white, he's fucked. :rolleyes:

[Maple Leafs]

Actually, I was on the phone with my gf who lived in France for a while, and she said that although th French really care about the TdF, their level of interest in things cycling is really about the level of their fifth or sixth most popular sport. If her recollection is correct, than this is more analagous to someone calling up ESPN and saying that there was a random NHL sample that turned up oistive and asking if they want to pursue it.I was using baseball as an example more due to the desire to see Bonds busted, not so much due to any popularity comparison. I think Bonds is an imperfect comparison, but he's at least in the same ballpark in terms of being a guy who is strongly suspected of using enhancers, isn't especially well-liked, and who would sell a lot of newspapers for whoever could nail him on it.

As for their being hundreds of riders, you're right, but there were also multiple positives. So maybe a better analogy would be if ESPN found out that two dozen players in the National League had tested positive. I think they'd still dig on that a little.

You can probably call it a witch hunt, but I don't buy the conspiracy talk. I think people here assume that every European newspaper is the equivalent of the British tabloids, but from what I've heard this one is very credible.

[Abe Sargent]

Very good article, Maple Leafs. It put things in perspective a bit.

Anxiety, your girlfriend is wrong about the importance of the Tour de France in France. While it is true that cycling in general is not that big a deal, the Tour is one of the top 2 or 3 sporting events each year.
Also, for info, there are 180 riders in the TdF.


Ummm, that's what I said. The TDF is really big, yet cycling as a sport is only 5th or so on the sports list.


-Anxiety