The plot thickens

[Chuffy]

I've been pondering this very point. There's a great deal of conjecture about the fall of Livestrong/Armstrong etc but I don't really know exactly what the Feds are concentrating on (evidence wise), what they themselves will use in any charges brought and in the following trials etc. Their remit was (I thought) the use/misuse of federal funds within the US Postal Team. That will take them into the 'did USPS dope?' line of investigation but whether they'll really give a damn about exactly who did or didn't dope, or when or how, I just dunno.

It may well just be financial/legal charges filed by the Feds. Obviously, if LA is directly implicated then that will set off a chain of events. It would be interesting, to me at least, to know exactly what the Feds will do with any direct evidence of riders doping; if they'll make it available to UCI etc, or just sit on it.

...but all will be revealed in the fullness of time.

Thoughtful stuff. It's easy to get overexcited by the investigation and I do wonder if the UCI will take any action, regardless of what the Feds turn up. I would fully expect the UCI to sit on things and do nothing. After all, He has retired, other riders (Hincapie, Leipheimer) are either retired or near retirement and it's all ancient history isn't it? I'm sure they would rather let sleeping dogs lie. For me, that isn't good enough. If USP/Disco can be definitively exposed then at last we'll have a chance to draw a line under the whole era. Op Peurto ripped off half the scab but there's still lots of nastiness festering beneath. Plus, there's a better chance that the likes of Bruyneel can be got rid of. Finally, it might just bring home to the current peloton that no-one, no-one, is immune. That should scare the crap out of a few people who need shaking up.

But as you say, it may be that the Feds treat this as a fraud case which just happens to coincide with sport. Unless the UCI et al are prepared to listen and act then it's all pretty meaningless.

 

[stampedingviking]

I just want to find out where I can get me some EPO!

I've got a fridge full


















Because I'm on haemodialysis, not for any other reason though.

 

[akaAndrew]

The fact that the investigators offered this 'amnesty' to ex-USPS riders is what made me think. Basically, they don't give a damn who doped, they're just interested in whether state funds paid for doping. They'll nail anyone that lies to them for perjury but they won't bring doping charges against individuals who might confess. Why? Because it's not their remit, that's why. They're not interested.

I don't know Armstrong's level of involvement with USPS's 'training' program. There have been allegations that Armstrong insisted his team come 'up to standard' with the European doping programmes but what truth there is in that is anyone's guess. And will the Feds even really care about that anyway?

So, as I read it, Armstrong could come out of this tarnished only by association. A scratch but nothing damning, and certainly insufficient to dent the adoration of the legions of followers.

My hope is, even if the Feds do have a limit, that they could still potentially stir things up enough for UCI to return the donations and finally do something. Because, for myself, I think was a Armstrong was a systematic doper (no proof, just from what I've read) at some point in his career. He was, no doubt, among many others but nobody has quite built their store around it quite like he has.

 

[Noodley]

Armstrong could come out of this tarnished only by association. A scratch but nothing damning, and certainly insufficient to dent the adoration of the legions of followers.

Armstrong could be pictured walking away with syringes in his hands and his legions of fans would say he was trying to help by removing temptation....

 

[mangaman]

Thoughtful stuff. It's easy to get overexcited by the investigation and I do wonder if the UCI will take any action, regardless of what the Feds turn up. I would fully expect the UCI to sit on things and do nothing. After all, He has retired, other riders (Hincapie, Leipheimer) are either retired or near retirement and it's all ancient history isn't it? I'm sure they would rather let sleeping dogs lie. For me, that isn't good enough. If USP/Disco can be definitively exposed then at last we'll have a chance to draw a line under the whole era. Op Peurto ripped off half the scab but there's still lots of nastiness festering beneath. Plus, there's a better chance that the likes of Bruyneel can be got rid of. Finally, it might just bring home to the current peloton that no-one, no-one, is immune. That should scare the crap out of a few people who need shaking up.

But as you say, it may be that the Feds treat this as a fraud case which just happens to coincide with sport. Unless the UCI et al are prepared to listen and act then it's all pretty meaningless.

Interersting Chuffy.

You never know with the FBI - they could decide to get heavy on Armstrong - on his alleged misappropriation of USPS money- and, I'm sure, misrepresentation of his image rights for monetary gain (if they prove he doped).

Either that or they'll gloss everything and Armstrong will retire into an increasingly underwhelming "celebrity" in the US - I see celebrity-based crap shows in his future.

OR they'll pull out all the FBI stops, and reveal they have been tapping his phone to Bruyneel for years, which wouldn't look so good. (for example)

They are an odd and hard to predict organisation!

Also - I agree with Delfse. The widespread use of EPO began during Indurain's career. Indurain's stats are the same throughout his career. Suddenly he is outperformed by Riis and Ullrich in 1996 and we know why now.

Indurain was doing the same years earlier - since 1991 - yet no-one could live with him until the self confessed T-mobile 1996 doped up winner Riis and his sidekick Ullrich.

I think most people would agree Indurain was the best GT time-trialler ever. He held on in the mountains - nothing more really.

He certainly couldn' t dominate nearly 7 years of TTs in the TDF and still attack in the mountains a la Armstrong.

That's the stuff of fairy tales

 

[wafflycat]

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/trek-officials-speak-with-federal-investigators

 

[Chuffy]

Indurain was doing the same years earlier - since 1991 - yet no-one could live with him until the self confessed T-mobile 1996 doped up winner Riis and his sidekick Ullrich.

I think most people would agree Indurain was the best GT time-trialler ever. He held on in the mountains - nothing more really.

He certainly couldn' t dominate nearly 7 years of TTs in the TDF and still attack in the mountains a la Armstrong.

That's the stuff of fairy tales

Not so: "[size="-1"]Indurain, however, could more than just hold on in the mountains. He was an accomplished climber and could apply pressure in the mountains as well. In addition, he was a force on the flats due to his large frame."[/size]
I thought that part of his particular legend was the way that he would 'gift' victories to the other riders, particularly those who he had been climbing with? That's not someone 'hanging on'. As for being beaten by the T-Mobile blood brothers, well that would just be the natural progression from one generation to another, being juiced to the ears doesn't make you invincible and doesn't stop you from getting older.

 

[Crackle]

'87 sounds early to me. Epogen was only approved by the FDA in '89, although I suppose there might have been sources prior to that.

The Herrera quote is interesting - he made it in the context of giving reasons for retiring from pro-cycling. He retired in '92 which suggests that usage had become widespread in the early '90s.

Roche is rumoured to have used it in '87 for his double

 

[dellzeqq]

Thoughtful stuff. It's easy to get overexcited by the investigation and I do wonder if the UCI will take any action, regardless of what the Feds turn up. I would fully expect the UCI to sit on things and do nothing. After all, He has retired, other riders (Hincapie, Leipheimer) are either retired or near retirement and it's all ancient history isn't it? I'm sure they would rather let sleeping dogs lie. For me, that isn't good enough. If USP/Disco can be definitively exposed then at last we'll have a chance to draw a line under the whole era. Op Peurto ripped off half the scab but there's still lots of nastiness festering beneath. Plus, there's a better chance that the likes of Bruyneel can be got rid of. Finally, it might just bring home to the current peloton that no-one, no-one, is immune. That should scare the crap out of a few people who need shaking up.

But as you say, it may be that the Feds treat this as a fraud case which just happens to coincide with sport. Unless the UCI et al are prepared to listen and act then it's all pretty meaningless.

but how far back would you go? If Armstrong was condemned as a drug cheat the UCI would have to start tracking back to....Indurain? Hinault? I'm not arguing with your consistency, but, taken to the limit, cycling history would disappear in a cloud of syringes. And what good would it do?

 

[Chuffy]

Anybody read the forums on Cycling News? Blimey, you don't want to be a 'fanboy' over there! I thought I was a hater but I'm lilly livered compared to many of them!! Good source of info though. Since my recent conversion to the dark side of loving cancer, I've found out a lot of stuff (and read considered opinion) over there.

Bloody hellfire! I'm circling it like a stray pube going round the plughole. Sooner or later I'm going to be sucked in forever....
Like you say, very informative and I feel like a complete amateur!

EDIT: one of the guys on there has teh best avatar.

 

[Hont]

The LA thread is currently running to 671 pages.

 

[Hont]

He held on in the mountains - nothing more really.

That statement is not born out by the facts unfortunately. As well as Luz Ardiden, which I've mentioned, there are numerous other occasions when he arrived at the top in the lead group and gifted the stage. e.g. 1991 at Val Louron when it was just him and Chiappucci.

Dropping Lemond, Fignon, Hampsten and Delgado is more than just "hanging on".

 

[yello]

Bloody hellfire! I'm circling it like a stray pube going round the plughole. Sooner or later I'm going to be sucked in forever....Like you say, very informative and I feel like a complete amateur!

Take the plunge! Seriously. Yes, there's the normal is/isn't type of debates but there's also some folk over there that know the US cycling scene in depth, know various players and (seemingly) get inside info. I suspect there are some there that have even been (or still are) involved in these things; i.e. not armchair commentators like me and thee!

I wouldn't dream of entering the debates but admire the perspective and knowledge of many of the debates over there. And if you want a laugh, look out for WonderLance!

Edit: btw, it was from reading the posts and opinions there that made my conversion to the dark side complete.

 

[Chuffy]

Take the plunge! Seriously. Yes, there's the normal is/isn't type of debates but there's also some folk over there that know the US cycling scene in depth, know various players and (seemingly) get inside info. I suspect there are some there that have even been (or still are) involved in these things; i.e. not armchair commentators like me and thee!

I wouldn't dream of entering the debates but admire the perspective and knowledge of many of the debates over there. And if you want a laugh, look out for WonderLance!

Edit: btw, it was from reading the posts and opinions there that made my conversion to the dark side complete.

Heh. I had a 'quick look' and surfaced over an hour later. I'm so going to get sacked!
Yes, lots of the usual armchair bullshit (guilty as charged up m'lud) but lots of useful info. Do you read Toto? I've been enjoying that for a while now but many of the references go over my head, mainly because I don't know about the US scene. Looks like I might have a chance to pick up on some of those gags now. Cool.

They don't seem to like Wiggy much!

 

[kennykool]

Can't believe anyone who follows cycling thinks this. It's following cycling that has taught me to question every outstanding physical performance in sport (not just cycling but athletics, tennis, football, rugby etc.).

There's nothing wrong with wanting to believe that someone is clean, but believing it despite all of the indicators to the contrary is denial.

What indicators?