Now Hincapie has told federal authorities he saw ...

[Pete Serotta]

Chapter 2 :hello: :fight:


Lance story and Tyler in person talking about the doping are on 60 Minutes tonight


pete

[thwart]

60 Minutes piece just ended... pretty strong stuff. Wonder if LA is considering his end game at this point?

[Lifelover]

60 Minutes piece just ended... pretty strong stuff. Wonder if LA is considering his end game at this point?


Goes to show you how much this story is like politics. Although I believe LA most likely doped, I watched it and came away thinking it was pretty weak.

Certainly nothing new came out of it.

[BengeBoy]

Certainly nothing new came out of it.

George Hincapie testifying to grand jury = new.

[97CSI]

That's it................ my hero is dead meat. Can't take it any more. Sold the Ottrott. Selling all the parts (see Classifieds). I'm no longer going to ride bicycles. At least not until we return from Bermuda in a couple of weeks.

Am thinking Tyler has less than no friends these days. And, what a huge waste of taxpayer dollars. Especially on what is such a minor sport in the U.S. We should be going after the pols who use taxpayer money to build sports stadiums, etc., for the rich. Only problem with that is they are the folks who write the rules allowing them to do so. Nothing like a stupid electorate (can you say 'tea party'?). :crap:

[BCS]

TAnd, what a huge waste of taxpayer dollars.... Nothing like a stupid electorate (can you say 'tea party'?). :crap:

While it is a waste of taxpayer dollars and the electorate is generally stupid, the tea party comment makes no sense as they favor less government (among other things). The fact that Hincapie and grand jury appear in the same sentence equals too much govt.

[130R]

sometimes it sucks having no tv. :butt:

[Grant McLean]

Certainly nothing new came out of it.

So you want a magic wand to wave and end doping in pro sports?

Building the case that accurately portrays what has been happening isn't
going to happen in a few minutes on a TV show.

But the progression from doing nothing, to where it's at now,
has been remarkable, in my opinion.....Like sending Marion Jones to jail
for 6 months, like bringing pro baseball players before congress, like
european countries criminalizing possession of banned drugs.

It's a process. One that hopefully makes it easier for kids like Tyler
to say no when they're handed the 'special' lunch bag.

-g

[Mattbotak]

sometimes it sucks having no tv. :butt:

Ditto.

Does anyone know what Hincapie stated to the Grand Jury?

[wc1934]

ok, so Tyler spills his guts to the grand jury, but why does he go on 60 minutes - what was to be gained.
George apparently was also issued a subpoena and testified, but he has not said a word to the public about his testimony.

[ultraman6970]

So far i have not read anything that says that he just told everything he knows, maybe he said everything he knows, doesnt mean he told what they wanted to hear also.

[majorpat]

Maybe Tyler went on 60 minutes because that show is considered to be something of an "official" place to do such things. Maybe he finally cracked and needed to tell the truth.
To say it doesn't bring up anything new is, in my opinion, incorrect. Many pros have confessed to their own doping but few have outed teammates, team, managers etc. This seems pretty new to me and is another step in the process, as Grant says.

[Grant McLean]

sometimes it sucks having no tv. :butt:

it's on line now

http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=7366948n&tag=cbsnewsMainColumnArea.6


-g

[djg21]

Ditto.

Does anyone know what Hincapie stated to the Grand Jury?

Grand jury proceedings are secret. If 60 Minutes had it right, it was leaked.

Lance is now under a bus (along with Hincapie). His brand is ruined, and I would not be surprised to see charges filed against Lance.

Obviously serious and perhaps more important questions were raised about the UCI, and I hope to see investigations and indictment. The sport needs to start with a clean slate.

[ultraman6970]

it's on line now

http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=7366948n&tag=cbsnewsMainColumnArea.6


-g


u meant this??

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2011/05/20/60minutes/main20064858.shtml?tag=cbsContent;cbsCarousel

[thwart]

ok, so Tyler spills his guts to the grand jury, but why does he go on 60 minutes - what was to be gained. Suspect he can probably use the fee paid for the interview. And it's pretty big stuff---we are experiencing some severe weather here, and halfway through the interview the local channel cut away to show radar and talk about a tornado warning fairly nearby... then said we're continuing this coverage on our adjacent channel 'so you don't miss the LA piece'. That is very unusual.

[dekindy]

While it is a waste of taxpayer dollars and the electorate is generally stupid, the tea party comment makes no sense as they favor less government (among other things). The fact that Hincapie and grand jury appear in the same sentence equals too much govt.

I think he meant the Tea Party was the solution for the problem of too much government as evidenced by the pro cycling doping investigation. At least that is the way I interpreted the comment.

[djg21]

Suspect he can probably use the fee paid for the interview. And it's pretty big stuff---we are experiencing some severe weather here, and halfway through the interview the local channel cut away to show radar and talk about a tornado warning fairly nearby... then said we're continuing this coverage on our adjacent channel 'so you don't miss the LA piece'. That is very unusual.


Maybe redemption? A chance to take blame and clear his name?

[Elefantino]

I might soon be time to cue the late, great Dandy Don...

http://ricklimpert.squarespace.com/storage/meredith.jpg?__SQUARESPACE_CACHEVERSION=1291649342 704

Turn out the lights
The party's over

[rugbysecondrow]

As a neophyte to cycling, is there any drug test(s) that would be sufficient to end drug use in the sport? From what I have read, cyclists have gone through some very elaborate means to avoid detection, in reality, can this ingenuity be beat or detected? Are these methods employed now when they weren't a decade ago? If so. Is the sport cleaner than it was? Is it reasonable to think the sport will ever actually be clean, at least within a tolerance?

Regardless of the LA issues, can what he is alleged to have done actually be curtailed or caught after the fact?

[BengeBoy]

Suspect he can probably use the fee paid for the interview.

60 Minutes doesn't pay for interviews.

[Rueda Tropical]

As a neophyte to cycling, is there any drug test(s) that would be sufficient to end drug use in the sport? From what I have read, cyclists have gone through some very elaborate means to avoid detection, in reality, can this ingenuity be beat or detected? Are these methods employed now when they weren't a decade ago? If so. Is the sport cleaner than it was? Is it reasonable to think the sport will ever actually be clean, at least within a tolerance?

Regardless of the LA issues, can what he is alleged to have done actually be curtailed or caught after the fact?

Testing and cheating are both always advancing new methods. It's not so easy for someone to develop an effective cheating program. Every star cyclist who left Armstrong's team was busted. All the second and third place Tour winners got busted sooner or later and not always because of failed drug tests -some of them never failed a test.

If a side effect of this investigation is the break up of the most experienced network of doping enablers (Ferrari, Bruyneel, maybe even the UCI and who knows who else?) it will set things back for doping. These guys have been at it since the glory days of EPO. They have a lot of collective experience at the science of cheating. It requires trainers, doctors and athletes working in concert over a period of time to do it effectively while avoiding detection. The sophistication of testing will advance while the dopers will have to build a new network of experienced experts.

There will always be some doping and new drugs and methods may evolve that avoid detection but if you want a sport and not the WWF then efforts must be made to keep the sport clean. This is not the aim of Novitzky's investigation it maybe a positive side consequence of it however.

[indyrider]

Goes to show you how much this story is like politics. Although I believe LA most likely doped, I watched it and came away thinking it was pretty weak.

Certainly nothing new came out of it.

Man, youre still drinking the LA coolaid arent ya... :beer:

Sometimes the truth is hard to realize and reality is even harder to accept...Speaking of politics, as you mentioned, reminds me of Irag and WMD's...even when the truth is right in front of you, you fail to admit youre wrong!

[djg21]

Testing and cheating are both always advancing new methods. It's not so easy for someone to develop an effective cheating program. Every star cyclist who left Armstrong's team was busted. All the second and third place Tour winners got busted sooner or later and not always because of failed drug tests -some of them never failed a test.

If a side effect of this investigation is the break up of the most experienced network of doping enablers (Ferrari, Bruyneel, maybe even the UCI and who knows who else?) it will set things back for doping. These guys have been at it since the glory days of EPO. They have a lot of collective experience at the science of cheating. It requires trainers, doctors and athletes working in concert over a period of time to do it effectively while avoiding detection. The sophistication of testing will advance while the dopers will have to build a new network of experienced experts.

There will always be some doping and new drugs and methods may evolve that avoid detection but if you want a sport and not the WWF then efforts must be made to keep the sport clean. This is not the aim of Novitzky's investigation it maybe a positive side consequence of it however.

If they continue looking at stored samples taken from past riders using advancing testing protocols, there will be a significant downside to doping even if a cheat can evade current-day state-of-the art testing.

[rugbysecondrow]

Testing and cheating are both always advancing new methods. It's not so easy for someone to develop an effective cheating program. Every star cyclist who left Armstrong's team was busted. All the second and third place Tour winners got busted sooner or later and not always because of failed drug tests -some of them never failed a test.

If a side effect of this investigation is the break up of the most experienced network of doping enablers (Ferrari, Bruyneel, maybe even the UCI and who knows who else?) it will set things back for doping. These guys have been at it since the glory days of EPO. They have a lot of collective experience at the science of cheating. It requires trainers, doctors and athletes working in concert over a period of time to do it effectively while avoiding detection. The sophistication of testing will advance while the dopers will have to build a new network of experienced experts.

There will always be some doping and new drugs and methods may evolve that avoid detection but if you want a sport and not the WWF then efforts must be made to keep the sport clean. This is not the aim of Novitzky's investigation it maybe a positive side consequence of it however.

I agree with efforts to keep the sport clean, but I am also trying to understand what success means and if the efforts are fruitful. Not wanting to get bogged down in the LA issues since there are obvious differences of opinions, but what will be a successful program that will help clean the sport or is that possible?

Is the sport cleaner now, with enhanced testing methods, than in 2000?

With enhanced testing, is it an issue of science lagging or more an issue of lacking the dedication to have a clean sport?

[Rueda Tropical]

Is the sport cleaner now, with enhanced testing methods, than in 2000?

Maybe. Micro dosing is probably not as effective as full on EPO juicing but doping of some variety may be still widespread


With enhanced testing, is it an issue of science lagging or more an issue of lacking the dedication to have a clean sport?

Both. If the UCI is crooked there are big problems. It will always be a tug of war sometimes the dopers will have the advantage and sometimes the regulatory authorities.

Looking back on the 90's not many guys got away with it in the end. Most of the Tour podium of that decade was busted eventually. By the time Novitzky and the French and Italian authorities are done maybe none of the dopers will have cheated successfully from that era. That should give someone pause about the risk reward ratio of doping.

[indyrider]

Not wanting to get bogged down in the LA issues since there are obvious differences of opinions, but what will be a successful program that will help clean the sport or is that possible?




My head is spinning d/t reading all of the posts in the Tyler/Hincapie threads so not sure if this was mentioned, but I think that the only way to truly rid the sport of doping is to institute a lifetime ban policy.

If you are caught doping, thats it, youre out for life. No BS strike one, two or three, or a handslap here or $120,000 there. All it will take is one or two boneheads to get caught and the rest of the peloton will piss clean for years.

[William]

http://toast.anu.edu.au/includes/images/toast_slices.jpg

[1happygirl]

I might soon be time to cue the late, great Dandy Don...

http://ricklimpert.squarespace.com/storage/meredith.jpg?__SQUARESPACE_CACHEVERSION=1291649342 704

Turn out the lights
The party's over


Hahaha Dandy Don.

Hey but is the LA thing really really really necessary? Even my parents (far from knowing anything about pro cycling) ask are they crazee spending money like this after all these years?

Tyler to me showed a lot of eye blinking, nystagmus, twitching etc. He looked like he was paranoid. Goodness, did he not realize he was on tv after all? He acted like he was trying to hide what he was saying in case someone might hear him. Ughhh #not credible

[Lifelover]

So you want a magic wand to wave and end doping in pro sports?

......


I'm not naive or stupid enough to think that you, me or anyone else can stop doping in pro sports. Let the sport's governing bodies do the best they can to control it and move on.

Man, youre still drinking the LA coolaid arent ya... :beer:

Sometimes the truth is hard to realize and reality is even harder to accept...Speaking of politics, as you mentioned, reminds me of Irag and WMD's...even when the truth is right in front of you, you fail to admit youre wrong!

and you need to work on reading comprehension. I don't doubt that Lance Armstrong, Tiger Woods, Michael Jordan or any other athlete at the top of their sport in the last 20 years took PEDs at some point.

I just don't care and see it as a major waste of time an effort for anyone outside of the sport's governing body to try and deal with it.

I know, It's for the kids! Save the Kids from the evils of the world.

[Grant McLean]

I know, It's for the kids! Save the Kids from the evils of the world.

Toys in happy meals?

-g

[Ray]

Lance doped, Merckx doped, Jaques doped, Alberto and Fabian dope - so did and do all of the serious rivals who chased and are chasing these guys. I don't think there's been a serious contender at the high end of the sport in the history of the sport who DIDN'T dope with whatever was available in their day.

I personally don't think doping in sport SHOULD be a criminal matter. I personally don't think recreational drugs SHOULD be a criminal matter either. Or most types of personal behaviors done among consenting adults. In terms of doping in sports, if a particular sport thinks they have a chance in hell of actually cleaning up their sport, I wish them the very best of luck and have very little faith that they'll succeed, but don't have any philosophical problem with the attempt.

But given that some aspects of doping ARE criminal violations today, I guess the govt has to do some level of enforcement. I personally think they ought to treat this stuff less seriously than traffic tickets though, because these are relatively victimless crimes and traffic violations can kill other people. But we've always been a puritanical bunch and we get our panties all the more twisted over "moral" crimes (drugs and prostitution are big!) than we do over stuff everyone does that can actually harm other people - still too many slaps on the wrist for drunk driving charges, for example. So I don't have too much of an opinion on how far the prosecutions of these guys should go, other than not all that far. I'm pretty convinced Lance is a major league prick to the extent I can know this about someone I've never personally met. So if someone's going down, it couldn't happen to a nicer guy. But still, being a major league prick isn't a crime...

Hey, I'm really enjoying watching Alberto's dominating performance in Italy this month. And I'm not terribly concerned about how he's doing it - he's still doing it WAAAAAAY better than anyone else and that's what I like to see.

-Ray

[Climb01742]

watching tyler speak, i'm sure we each had a different reaction. FWIW, here's mine:

i really felt for the guy. he's tormented and conflicted. he seemed to be trying to tell the truth. he never threw lance under the bus without throwing himself and "all of us" under there with lance. he put the responsibility on all parties: with the UCI for cynically playing both sides; on team management for pressuring riders; and on riders between a rock and a hard place.

i can only imagine being a rider put in the vise of do i or don't i dope?

tyler seems like a flawed human being who did some things he wishes he hadn't and is trying to get some piece (peace?) of his soul back. isn't that all of us, in one way or another? but we're luckier. our mistakes and our amends play out in private.

peace, tyler.

[Rueda Tropical]

For the Feds this case is about a multi-million dollar financial fraud that involved a government agencies' money. And the illegal activity is ongoing... it looks like the Radioshack team deposited large sums of money into Dr. Ferrari's account last year. A lot of the players still have key positions in the sport, so for cycling it's a lot more then who doped a decade ago.

Of course Armstrong thinks prosecuting his illegal activity is a waste of tax payers money - but sports is a big business just like banking, insurance or real estate. Break the law in a high profile way and don't be shocked if you invite the interest of the authorities, especially if one of your partners in crime spills the beans on national TV. This investigation has major legs now and will impact the sport in a big way, as now the French and the Italians are involved and the UCI may wind up being exposed as corrupt.

I'm interested in how the fallout from the investigation can help clean out some of the cheats and crooks still active at the top levels of the sport.

[97CSI]

Can forgive Tyler and the rest (yes, LA, too) except when they roll-over on their 'friends' and co-workers. Omerta, bro........

[Rueda Tropical]

Can forgive Tyler and the rest (yes, LA, too) except when they roll-over on their 'friends' and co-workers. Omerta, bro........

No one is going to jail for Armstrong and if you think Armstrong would go to jail to protect his domestiques (or anyone else) I have a bridge in Brooklyn to sell you. Pretty soon it will be down to Bruyneel and Armstrong. Who makes a deal at who's expense first? Does Bruyneel skip town before the Feds come calling?

[William]

Can forgive Tyler and the rest (yes, LA, too) except when they roll-over on their 'friends' and co-workers. Omerta, bro........

Easy to say when you don't have the threat of prison, perjury, and massive fines hanging over your head.


I think the good Doctor got it about the LA clean persona ....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r0yXqU-w9U0





W.

[flydhest]

climb,
Interesting reaction. My wife, a non-cyclist with no understanding of the story that went on, asked me, "do you think Lance doped?" I said, "yes, why do you ask?" She said, "because this guy on TV [we were watching Tyler last night] is lying about something. I don't know if it is about Armstrong, but he's lying about something."

That summarized my take watching him. I don't have any trouble believing LA broke rules (along with everyone else at the front of the peloton) it's just that Tyler has no credibility and with a book coming out, may have other motives for sensational statements.

watching tyler speak, i'm sure we each had a different reaction. FWIW, here's mine:

i really felt for the guy. he's tormented and conflicted. he seemed to be trying to tell the truth. he never threw lance under the bus without throwing himself and "all of us" under there with lance. he put the responsibility on all parties: with the UCI for cynically playing both sides; on team management for pressuring riders; and on riders between a rock and a hard place.

i can only imagine being a rider put in the vise of do i or don't i dope?

tyler seems like a flawed human being who did some things he wishes he hadn't and is trying to get some piece (peace?) of his soul back. isn't that all of us, in one way or another? but we're luckier. our mistakes and our amends play out in private.

peace, tyler.

[William]

climb,
Interesting reaction. My wife, a non-cyclist with no understanding of the story that went on, asked me, "do you think Lance doped?" I said, "yes, why do you ask?" She said, "because this guy on TV [we were watching Tyler last night] is lying about something. I don't know if it is about Armstrong, but he's lying about something."

That summarized my take watching him. I don't have any trouble believing LA broke rules (along with everyone else at the front of the peloton) it's just that Tyler has no credibility and with a book coming out, may have other motives for sensational statements.

That would mean that he would have also lied to the Grand Jury and is risking jail time just to get a book out. What he said in his interview would have to match his testimony.

I'm not sure if Big George has a book coming out?

As with anything in life, people are always going to have a different take on what they hear and what they see. I feel like Climb did, and I outlined my thoughts on Tyler in the "Tyler" thread.

I don't know how all this will shake out....but....Marion Jones never tested positive either, yet see where she ended up.



William

[pmac]

For the Feds this case is about a multi-million dollar financial fraud that involved a government agencies' money. And the illegal activity is ongoing... it looks like the Radioshack team deposited large sums of money into Dr. Ferrari's account last year.

I missed the part about the Radioshack/Ferrari connection. Do you know where it was reported, or better yet a link?

[sjbraun]

Rueda Tropical wrote:

For the Feds this case is about a multi-million dollar financial fraud that involved a government agencies' money.

Multi million dollar? Sure, the USPS spent millions supporting the team, but are you saying the doping activities involved millions? Do you have evidence to support this? (I'm not calling you out or challenging your assertion, I'm just curious about the scope of the problem.)


- but sports is a big business just like banking, insurance or real estate.

Not even close. The economy doesn't shut sown if professional cycling (or baseball or football of the WWF,) shut down

[sjbraun]

Does anyone know the specific allegations that are being investigated by the Feds against Lance et al?

[Germany_chris]

Lance doped, Merckx doped, Jaques doped, Alberto and Fabian dope - so did and do all of the serious rivals who chased and are chasing these guys. I don't think there's been a serious contender at the high end of the sport in the history of the sport who DIDN'T dope with whatever was available in their day.

I personally don't think doping in sport SHOULD be a criminal matter. I personally don't think recreational drugs SHOULD be a criminal matter either. Or most types of personal behaviors done among consenting adults. In terms of doping in sports, if a particular sport thinks they have a chance in hell of actually cleaning up their sport, I wish them the very best of luck and have very little faith that they'll succeed, but don't have any philosophical problem with the attempt.

But given that some aspects of doping ARE criminal violations today, I guess the govt has to do some level of enforcement. I personally think they ought to treat this stuff less seriously than traffic tickets though, because these are relatively victimless crimes and traffic violations can kill other people. But we've always been a puritanical bunch and we get our panties all the more twisted over "moral" crimes (drugs and prostitution are big!) than we do over stuff everyone does that can actually harm other people - still too many slaps on the wrist for drunk driving charges, for example. So I don't have too much of an opinion on how far the prosecutions of these guys should go, other than not all that far. I'm pretty convinced Lance is a major league prick to the extent I can know this about someone I've never personally met. So if someone's going down, it couldn't happen to a nicer guy. But still, being a major league prick isn't a crime...

Hey, I'm really enjoying watching Alberto's dominating performance in Italy this month. And I'm not terribly concerned about how he's doing it - he's still doing it WAAAAAAY better than anyone else and that's what I like to see.

-Ray


+1 Couldn't have stated it better, I would have used less pleasant language.

Maybe folks ought to keep their "Moral" indignation to themselves.

The issue is should we prosecute LA for supposed doping a decade ago, and do we think he lied about his doping.

All this emotional bulls*** about making peace and books is crap.

If there is any decency left in the world there should be some new fedeal jobs opening in the next few weeks.

[sjbraun]

Over at Bike Hugger, a good question is being asked.

"George Hincapie says he himself doped.

Where are calls for him to serve a ban from cycling, to testify to the UCI, to return any prize money he earned from Le Tour (after all he got a share of Lance’s win). Why are we only focused on Lance and not on the whole problem? Sure, it’s easier to look at someone like Lance or baseball’s Barry Bonds and point fingers—they’re the big targets. But this is huge news about George and it’s being covered as huge news about Lance. Neither the Bicycling nor the SI piece dedicate any space to Hincapie’s career and how doping changed his stats. Not…a…word."

[William]

Does anyone know the specific allegations that are being investigated by the Feds against Lance et al?

Correct me if I'm wrong,

I thought it boiled down to the specifics of the contract when they signed with USPS. Basically Stating that they weren't using PED's, and/or knew of/or were part of any doping program. If allegations are true, then not only did they lie, they used funds from a pseudo government entity to promote an illegal doping program and possibly pay off a Swiss lab.

Again, correct me if I'm wrong please.



William

[Climb01742]

climb,
Interesting reaction. My wife, a non-cyclist with no understanding of the story that went on, asked me, "do you think Lance doped?" I said, "yes, why do you ask?" She said, "because this guy on TV [we were watching Tyler last night] is lying about something. I don't know if it is about Armstrong, but he's lying about something."

That summarized my take watching him. I don't have any trouble believing LA broke rules (along with everyone else at the front of the peloton) it's just that Tyler has no credibility and with a book coming out, may have other motives for sensational statements.

this must be what it's like to be on a jury. same testimony, same faces. who knows who to believe? i'm only going on a gut reaction. my gut sure doesn't bat .1000, my friend. or maybe we're watching the cycling version of this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rashomon_%28film%29

:beer:

[Climb01742]

All this emotional bulls*** about making peace and books is crap.

can fair and honest people simply see things differently?

[jpw]

A subpoena is a subpoena. Who here would lie under oath to a criminal investigation knowing the consequences if found out? Hamilton had no choice. Hincapie had no choice. I'm wondering if they've cut deals with the prosecutor to testify against Armstrong in return for immunity?

[Bob Ross]

what a huge waste of taxpayer dollars.


^^^This.

[Elefantino]

A subpoena is a subpoena. Who here would lie under oath to a criminal investigation knowing the consequences if found out? Hamilton had no choice. Hincapie had no choice. I'm wondering if they've cut deals with the prosecutor to testify against Armstrong in return for immunity?
Hamilton got limited immunity. The limits haven't been specified, other than if the feds find out that he lied about anything, he likely does time.

[jpw]

Hamilton got limited immunity. The limits haven't been specified, other than if the feds find out that he lied about anything, he likely does time.

Then he was between a rock and hard place. It's totally understandable why he's now broken his silence. The line from LA's lawyer that he's promoting a book release doesn't seem at all convincing.

Marion Jones and Tim Montgomery went to prison. It isn't looking good for LA. The powers that be want to root out drug abuse and it looks like Armstrong is going to be made an example of. He's a big catch.

[djg21]

But given that some aspects of doping ARE criminal violations today, I guess the govt has to do some level of enforcement. I personally think they ought to treat this stuff less seriously than traffic tickets though, because these are relatively victimless crimes and traffic violations can kill other people.
-Ray

If Hamilton's statements to 60 Minutes (and his presumably consistent testimony at the Grand Jury) are credited, we are not talking merely about use of PEDs, but a conspiracy and criminal enterprise that encouraged, distributed and and trafficked in illicit drugs, and which permeates all aspects of the sport and involved team sponsors, doctors, coaches, riders, etc. I want to see investigations and prosecutions of every person involved. I want to see the offenders in prison, and stripped of all their ill-gotten gains.

[Germany_chris]

If Hamilton's statements to 60 Minutes (and his presumably consistent testimony at the Grand Jury) are credited, we are not talking merely about use of PEDs, but a conspiracy and criminal enterprise that encouraged, distributed and and trafficked in illicit drugs, and which permeates all aspects of the sport and involved team sponsors, doctors, coaches, riders, etc. I want to see investigations and prosecutions of every person involved. I want to see the offenders in prison, and stripped of all their ill-gotten gains.

Would you have the same moral indignation if the drugs were decriminalized.

[jpw]

If Hamilton's statements to 60 Minutes (and his presumably consistent testimony at the Grand Jury) are credited, we are not talking merely about use of PEDs, but a conspiracy and criminal enterprise that encouraged, distributed and and trafficked in illicit drugs, and which permeates all aspects of the sport and involved team sponsors, doctors, coaches, riders, etc. I want to see investigations and prosecutions of every person involved. I want to see the offenders in prison, and stripped of all their ill-gotten gains.

That would be the correct process and rightful outcome. However, to crack open the code of silence some have to be given a certain level of immunity otherwise there won't be evidence and testimony to build a prosecution case. They go after the big fish, and Armstrong is the biggest. I'd like to see Bruyneel go down. He's slippery.

[Germany_chris]

can fair and honest people simply see things differently?

The problem is we're not being fair or honest..we are looking at it through our moral lenses.

[fuzzalow]

The possibility of handing an indictment to LA is much more troublesome to LA and Co. Inc. than if the Fed were just going after LA as a PED user. Tailwind and other LA proxies are drawn into the allegations and investigation.

Now the Fed have possible illegal activity conducted by an organization of which LA is also the part owner and was an active manager of. All the other damages and performance contract frauds are almost an afterthought when foresight, planning and systematic support for doping comes from the team.

Motivation attributed to any of the witnesses, such as greed, book deals, etc. is just a diversion. The Fed subpoena trumped all of that.

[Climb01742]

The problem is we're not being fair or honest..we are looking at it through our moral lenses.

isn't that inescapable? aren't laws expressions of ethical/moral standards? isn't the key element in a discussion such as this, to acknowledge our personal lens and therefore leave open the possibility that, however strongly we hold our opinions, we could be wrong and the other fellow right? :beer:

[goonster]

I thought it boiled down to the specifics of the contract when they signed with USPS. Basically Stating that they weren't using PED's, and/or knew of/or were part of any doping program. If allegations are true, then not only did they lie, they used funds from a pseudo government entity to promote an illegal doping program and possibly pay off a Swiss lab.

This has been a consensus assumption on the interwebs, but I don't think the investigation is limited to, or even centrally motivated by, fraud on the USPS promotional contract.

Major media outlets keep referring to this as "an FDA investigation", so I suspect the thrust of the probe centers on a conspiracy to illegally distribute prescription medications.

Has Lance been subpoenaed yet? What's the strategy on this? Do you go get him on the record early, or do you talk to everybody else first and build an overwhelming dossier before offering him a crappy deal?

[Kontact]

In the grand scope of things, government wastes so much money that this particular waste of money is not worth getting upset about.


While there has been much discussion about the sport, fraud, the kids, I think that principle alone is worth something:

Our society should hold its literal and figurative leaders to a standard that matches the letter of the law. Not necessarily a higher standard, but a standard that realistically can't be maintained for every person and minor crime.

Bringing down LA is not just a question of a brash liar getting is just rewards or cleaning up cycling. It is a chance to hold ourselves accountable as a society that is essentially ethical - a society that will dethrone a hero because we have the convictions to do so.

Obviously, we need a lot more of this sort of thing happening to politicians, celebrities, CEOs and others with large influence. Corruption is not something you take a stand on once, but something you have to keep combating whenever or whereever it pops up.

I feel bad that an inspirational figure is dissolving before our eyes. I'd feel worse if we kept turning a blind eye to wrongdoing.

[Germany_chris]

isn't that inescapable? aren't laws expressions of ethical/moral standards? isn't the key element in a discussion such as this, to acknowledge our personal lens and therefore leave open the possibility that, however strongly we hold our opinions, we could be wrong and the other fellow right? :beer:

We are using, cheated, ill gotten etc. far too much for an open minded discussion. Yes we all use our lenses we can't help it thats why we keep judgments in our mind and not stated openly.

[Keith A]

climb,
Interesting reaction. My wife, a non-cyclist with no understanding of the story that went on, asked me, "do you think Lance doped?" I said, "yes, why do you ask?" She said, "because this guy on TV [we were watching Tyler last night] is lying about something. I don't know if it is about Armstrong, but he's lying about something."

That summarized my take watching him. I don't have any trouble believing LA broke rules (along with everyone else at the front of the peloton) it's just that Tyler has no credibility and with a book coming out, may have other motives for sensational statements.You know I wasn't sure to think of the way Tyler was communicating...it certainly seemed odd, but then again maybe that's just normal for him. My thoughts were either (1) he's lying or (2) this is really hard for him to come forward to talk about this and he is trying to keep his emotions under control.

[JMerring]

reading this thread as it relates to moral* relativism has me wondering whether we're debating the morality of alberto attacking andy following a chain drop, or knowingly cheating to gain a competitive advantage and lying about it. in the case of the former, sure, my moral lenses may lead me to a different answer than your moral lenses may lead you to, and reasonable minds can in fact disagree. in the case of the latter, however, reasonable minds shouldn't really differ on the morality of it. is it as morally repugnant as using outright lies and deception to cause the death and mutilation of hundreds of thousands of people? perhaps not, but that doesn't thereby make it moral.


* moral: concerned with the principles of right and wrong behavior and the goodness or badness of human character.

[rugbysecondrow]

So, if Lance cheated, and he did so with Dr. Ferrari and his direction, wouldn't it matter where he did it not just whether he did do it? If Lance did so, and Tyler said he did so, if it was in Europe or outside of the USA when it happened, to what degree can the US get involved in that? I am not a lawyer, so I am not trying to pretend to be one, but it seems drug use itself, or the legality of that use cannot be the issue since a) you would have to prove use, b) you would have to prove that a law was broken. A tainted sample doesn't necessarily mean a US law was broken.

It might be, like others have said, about fraud or a contractual issue. Interesting to say the least.

[dnades]

Did the CBS piece discuss who makes and sells the drugs?

[Germany_chris]

reading this thread as it relates to moral* relativism has me wondering whether we're debating the morality of alberto attacking andy following a chain drop, or knowingly cheating to gain a competitive advantage and lying about it. in the case of the former, sure, my moral lenses may lead me to a different answer than your moral lenses may lead you to, and reasonable minds can in fact disagree. in the case of the latter, however, reasonable minds shouldn't really differ on the morality of it. is it as morally repugnant as using outright lies and deception to cause the death and mutilation of hundreds of thousands of people? perhaps not, but that doesn't thereby make it moral.


* moral: concerned with the principles of right and wrong behavior and the goodness or badness of human character.

Using your morals to make a judgment, please don't judge based on your morals...I disagree with your morals and will not accept any judgment based on them.

You state that he's cheating I don't accept that as a beginning premise. There has to be common consensus before that can be declared any sort of actuality. This board prove that there is no common consensus on the use of PED's as cheating or wrong.

everything unconditional belongs in pathology.--Nietzsche--

[Ray]

Going to the issue of Tyler's appearance in the interview and the relative "truthiness" of his statements, he gained a lot of credibility with me when he said he didn't like talking about this and turning on Lance and then something to the effect of "with a little luck I'd still be out there doping and cheating and getting away with it too". Like he knows that's the way of the sport, he took part willingly, and he's only talking now because he's got some kind of limited immunity deal and if he lies, he goes to jail. He's not going to jail for Lance and, as someone noted earlier, Lance wouldn't be going to jail to protect any of these guys either.

Anyone who's willing to say THAT on national TV has just gotta be telling the truth. As Bob Dylan once said, “To live outside the law you must be honest”.

BTW, is this a great world or what - my browser accepted "truthiness" without even considering a spell check! :cool:

-Ray

[Len J]

climb,
Interesting reaction. My wife, a non-cyclist with no understanding of the story that went on, asked me, "do you think Lance doped?" I said, "yes, why do you ask?" She said, "because this guy on TV [we were watching Tyler last night] is lying about something. I don't know if it is about Armstrong, but he's lying about something."

That summarized my take watching him. I don't have any trouble believing LA broke rules (along with everyone else at the front of the peloton) it's just that Tyler has no credibility and with a book coming out, may have other motives for sensational statements.


That's interesting.

What I saw was a guy:

1.) Making sure that he stayed within the rules of his immunity...I.e. making sure his story was consistant. He was taking his time forming his answers.
2.) Battling against 60 minutes attempts to sensationalize this by making it all about LA...which Tyler kept in check somewhat by answering every question about LA with...."Yes, just like we all did, like I did."
3.) Fighting his own lack of comfort with the Media.
4.) In genuine remorse.

IMO

Len

[goonster]

Did the CBS piece discuss who makes and sells the drugs?
No.

The drugs are all made and distributed (initially) legally, the same way that frequently abused pain medications are. Remember also that physicians have wide latitude to prescribe medications for "off-label" use, i.e. for purposes other than those in the FDA license.

At some point, the drugs enter into an illegal network. When the physician knowingly prescribes drugs to a middleman, that is a crime, and when the drugs are distributed to third parties to commit sporting fraud, those are additional crimes (although there may not be laws specific to "sporting fraud" in the U.S.). Physicians have been prosecuted for this in Europe, after busted riders (e.g. the hapless Bernhard Kohl) gave up their suppliers. In another case, several doctors at the Freiburg clinic were found to supply banned substances and services to riders on the T-mobile team.

The only way the CBS piece touched on this is that Tyler recounted an occasion where he asked Lance for EPO, via a network of "secret" mobile phones, and shortly thereafter a courier package arrived, containing EPO. It is a bit thin (Tyler couldn't recall who was listed as the package's sender), but it implicates Lance not just in PED use, but in a conspiracy to illegally distribute them.

We can argue about whether this probe is a wise use of taxpayer funds, but I do think that criminal investigations and prosecutions are an effective way to find an punish doping. Certainly, that money is better spent than the millions spent on tests passed by riders who later fess up to years of systematic doping.

[goonster]

I kept thinking that, no matter how far he has fallen, Tyler was once quite a big fish himself.

He may not have won seven Tours, but he is no Jesus Manzano. Tour contender, team leader, LBL winner, Olympic TT champ . . . it's terrible to see him say that memories of his career bring only pain.

[drewski]

This is really a joke. I am not condoning Lance or Roger Clements, Barry
Bonds, etc. but c'mon. I think this is a big political show.
The problems with our country are much bigger than the ones
these men were involved with.

Politicians involved in the Iraq war and banking officials at the
bond rating agencies have yet to be held accountable for crimes
which were far, far more damaging. They are much higher in the priority list
IMHO.

[drewski]

Grand jury proceedings are secret. If 60 Minutes had it right, it was leaked.

Lance is now under a bus (along with Hincapie). His brand is ruined, and I would not be surprised to see charges filed against Lance.

Obviously serious and perhaps more important questions were raised about the UCI, and I hope to see investigations and indictment. The sport needs to start with a clean slate.

What choice did Hincapie have? You think he should have lied.
I don't.

[Kontact]

This is really a joke. I am not condoning Lance or Roger Clements, Barry
Bonds, etc. but c'mon. I think this is a big political show.
The problems with our country are much bigger than the ones
these men were involved with.

Politicians involved in the Iraq war and banking officials at the
bond rating agencies have yet to be held accountable for crimes
which were far, far more damaging. They are much higher in the priority list
IMHO.
I think we have a judicial system big enough for all of them.

[jpw]

EPO, what's its origin? Was it purely medical?

[JMerring]

Using your morals to make a judgment, please don't judge based on your morals...I disagree with your morals and will not accept any judgment based on them.

You state that he's cheating I don't accept that as a beginning premise. There has to be common consensus before that can be declared any sort of actuality. This board prove that there is no common consensus on the use of PED's as cheating or wrong.

everything unconditional belongs in pathology.--Nietzsche--

the athletes out there competing clean (or unable to compete because they refuse to be dirty) would probably disagree. that you don't think drugs in sport isn't cheating doesn't make it so.

and you have no idea what my morals are so you're in no position to agree or disagree with them.

veels geluk.

[Fixed]

Politicians involved in the Iraq war and banking officials at the
bond rating agencies have yet to be held accountable for crimes
which were far, far more damaging. They are much higher in the priority list
IMHO.
hear hear
cheers

[Germany_chris]

the athletes out there competing clean (or unable to compete because they refuse to be dirty) would probably disagree. that you don't think drugs in sport isn't cheating doesn't make it so.

and you have no idea what my morals are so you're in no position to agree or disagree with them.

veels geluk.

again you called it cheating that would be expressing your morals

it's Viel Glück

P.S. I'm not German

[Joachim]

EPO, what's its origin? Was it purely medical?

Readers Digest version: EPO stands for erythropoietin, it's a hormone that is produced by the kidneys to stimulate RBC production. EPO, like on the show, refers to non-endogenous EPO, made in mammalian cells (there are different types of EPO, long acting (CERA)/short acting, different isoforms etc). Its on-label use is mostly for anemia due to chronic kidney disease, cancer or anemia due to other diseases.

[Kontact]

again you called it cheating that would be expressing your morals

it's Viel Glück

P.S. I'm not German
Actually, this is more of an ethical than moral question. Morals are variable and personal, ethics are codified and often relate to law. Cheating (violating contractural rules for an advantage) in a paid sport is little different than accepting bribes or insider trading, which are unethical.

Morals and ethics can be at odds, but ethics aren't personal.

If LA rode over a mountain inside a van it wouldn't be much different than taking banned substances to make it easier. They are rule violations by any definition.

[firerescuefin]

Now, with reports coming out about the information being collected by the federal investigators, Betsy sees a limit to Armstrong's power. "Armstrong can prey on the weak, but he's no challenge for a federal investigation."

Agree with the comments on bigger fish to fry, but seeing a bully/dick backed into a corner that his own hands have built brings a smile to my face. Cycling and Cancer research will successfully move on without him.

[Clydesdale]

again you called it cheating that would be expressing your morals

it's Viel Glück

P.S. I'm not German

Chris,

To say that using banned drugs is cheating isn't a moral statement, but a fact according to the rules of cycling. Saying it should or shouldn't be illegal is a moral argument.

Yes?

[JMerring]

again you called it cheating that would be expressing your morals

it's Viel Glück

P.S. I'm not German

sorry - i thought you were south african but i could be mistaken.

when i use the word 'cheat' i'm stating a fact, not expressing my morals:

cheat/CHēt/
Verb: Act dishonestly or unfairly in order to gain an advantage, esp. in a game or examination: "she cheats at cards".
Noun: A person who behaves dishonestly in order to gain an advantage.

[Germany_chris]

Actually, this is more of an ethical than moral question. Morals are variable and personal, ethics are codified and often relate to law. Cheating (violating contractural rules for an advantage) in a paid sport is little different than accepting bribes or insider trading, which are unethical.

Morals and ethics can be at odds, but ethics aren't personal.

If LA rode over a mountain inside a van it wouldn't be much different than taking banned substances to make it easier. They are rule violations by any definition.

and ethics are based a given societies morals i.e. Shiria, morals codified into law.

The comparison isn't valid, a better comparison would be a cyclist riding an bike that is to light.

Drugs do not make the cyclist, the cyclist has to be there. I can Juice all day long and not be a body builder. A constant drip of EPO would not put me in the pro peloton.

The problem with unconditional statements is their limited applicability. He cheated is unconditional.

[Germany_chris]

Act dishonestly or unfairly in order to gain an advantage, esp. in a game or examination:

Not the only one doing it, therefore not unfair.

hence a statement of morals

[Elefantino]

From a column in the St. Louis Post-Dispatch:

"Because Lance Armstrong is not an obnoxious jerk, maybe because he comes off as a genuinely likeable human being who champions noble causes like cancer research, perhaps because his athletic stardom comes in a sport most of us are ambivalent to — but probably mostly because the sporting public has simply grown numb to the uncomfortable truth that a whole lot of notable athletes are doping their way to fame and fortune—the news from a "60 Minutes" story that says the world's greatest cyclist is a sophisticated drug cheat has been greeted with a mixed bag of indifference, sympathy and cynicism."

[1centaur]

Act dishonestly or unfairly in order to gain an advantage, esp. in a game or examination:

Not the only one doing it, therefore not unfair.

hence a statement of morals

"Not the only one" is not a standard contemplated in the dictionary for fairness, though children have tried that excuse.

Clearly he is not doping honestly, if he is doping. He is hiding his doping from the public and behaving in a way to evade detection by authorities.

I don't think it's at all reasonable to place cheating in the realm of moral or other relativism. Those can be saved for one's view of the cheating in question.

[JMerring]

Act dishonestly or unfairly in order to gain an advantage, esp. in a game or examination:

Not the only one doing it, therefore not unfair.

hence a statement of morals

i'm a lawyer; some lawyers cheat their clients by padding their bills; you're telling me, then, that it isn't unfair, and isn't cheating, for me to pad my bills because i wouldn't be the only one doing it?

you also seem to be assuming that everyone is doing it. assuming solely for arguments sake that this is true (i don't think it is - as cynical as i am on this issue, i still believe there are riders in the pro peloton who are clean), it wouldn't be unfair but it'd still be dishonest. unless, of course, under your moral constructs, dishonesty is ok.

[johnnymossville]

It's cheating if it goes against the rules set by the sport's governing body.

If the UCI said everyone had to ride on square wheels and someone showed up on round ones he'd be cheating.

[William]

The comparison isn't valid, a better comparison would be a cyclist riding an bike that is to light.

Which is against the established rules they agreed to race under so it's cheating/dishonest.

Drugs do not make the cyclist, the cyclist has to be there. I can Juice all day long and not be a body builder. A constant drip of EPO would not put me in the pro peloton.

True, but at the top level there is not a huge difference in their individual potential. The weakest have already been weeded out. Now the PED's can make the difference.


The problem with unconditional statements is their limited applicability. He cheated is unconditional.

If they break the established rules they agreed to race under, it's cheating/dishonest.

Not the only one doing it, therefore not unfair.

Again, If they break the established rules they agreed to race under, it's cheating/dishonest.




William

[mgm777]

Readers Digest version: EPO stands for erythropoietin, it's a hormone that is produced by the kidneys to stimulate RBC production. EPO, like on the show, refers to non-endogenous EPO, made in mammalian cells (there are different types of EPO, long acting (CERA)/short acting, different isoforms etc). Its on-label use is mostly for anemia due to chronic kidney disease, cancer or anemia due to other diseases.

Made by Amgen in Longmont, CO. Used by Cancer patients undergoing treatment as stated above.

[Kontact]

and ethics are based a given societies morals i.e. Shiria, morals codified into law.

The comparison isn't valid, a better comparison would be a cyclist riding an bike that is to light.

Drugs do not make the cyclist, the cyclist has to be there. I can Juice all day long and not be a body builder. A constant drip of EPO would not put me in the pro peloton.

The problem with unconditional statements is their limited applicability. He cheated is unconditional.
No, ethics are not morals. Some laws are moral in nature, but that doesn't mean they qualify as ethics. Ethics are codified rules within a given industry or pursuit that govern what can't be done for an advantage - even an advantage demanded by moral imperative.

I really don't understand the line you're apparently drawing. Races are sometimes won by seconds - does it really matter if you cheat a little or a lot? Either way, it is a violation of what you agreed to do when you signed up to be a professional.

The fact that YOU don't qualify to be a professional cyclist are rather beside the point - you aren't a law school graduate, either, so you don't have any ethical quandries to worry about as a lawyer, either. But a pro athlete, competing against other pro athletes does have an ethical responsibility to compete under the rules - or it isn't a competition.

[Germany_chris]

Which is against the established rules they agreed to race under so it's cheating/dishonest.



True, but at the top level there is not a huge difference in their individual potential. The weakest have already been weeded out. Now the PED's can make the difference.



If they break the established rules they agreed to race under, it's cheating/dishonest.



Again, If they break the established rules they agreed to race under, it's cheating/dishonest.




William

to Merring..no issue with bill padding, just like I have issue with the client firing the attorney for doing it.

IMHO it's not cheating, nor dishonest, by any definition. They are simply doing what it takes to WIN. When success/mission accomplishment is on the line I expect people to do what it take to accomplish it (within pretty broad limits)without futzing about pie in the sky rules particularly no doping. Tis easier to be forgiveness than ask permission.

This isn't moral relativism, we all have our morals/ethics to guide us. But we need to stop and consider others may not share those morals/ethics therefore don't judge others based on your values.

[93legendti]

Novitsky is an agent for the FDA investigating the use of steroids in professional sports (why?). He was an IRS agent.

The USPS is an independent agency of the United States government-a quasi gov't agency. The USPS has become self-sufficient and has not directly received taxpayer-dollars since the early 1980s with the minor exception of subsidies for costs associated with the disabled and overseas voters. It's expenses are paid by the sale of postal products.

None of us have an action for fraud against Lance, USPS, Tyler or Floyd, etc.

It would be easier and cheaper to stop steroid use in sports, if that is indeed the goal, to go after the people selling the steroids and/or providing scripts for the steroids.

Going after the end users one by one is inefficient, wasteful, expensive and, in this case, meant only for headlines.

[Germany_chris]

No, ethics are not morals. Some laws are moral in nature, but that doesn't mean they qualify as ethics. Ethics are codified rules within a given industry or pursuit that govern what can't be done for an advantage - even an advantage demanded by moral imperative.

I really don't understand the line you're apparently drawing. Races are sometimes won by seconds - does it really matter if you cheat a little or a lot? Either way, it is a violation of what you agreed to do when you signed up to be a professional.

The fact that YOU don't qualify to be a professional cyclist are rather beside the point - you aren't a law school graduate, either, so you don't have any ethical quandries to worry about as a lawyer, either. But a pro athlete, competing against other pro athletes does have an ethical responsibility to compete under the rules - or it isn't a competition.

Except it still is, just not the UCI vision of competition

[goonster]

They are simply doing what it takes to WIN. When success/mission accomplishment is on the line I expect people to do what it take to accomplish it (within pretty broad limits)without futzing about pie in the sky rules
Note to self: don't do business with this man.

[JMerring]

to Merring..no issue with bill padding, just like I have issue with the client firing the attorney for doing it.


when you need a corporate lawyer, please remember to look me up. i promise not to pad my bills. honest. :eek:

[Germany_chris]

Note to self: don't do business with this man.

Thank you!! ..I needed something to lighten the mood...

I should probably also log off to bring my blood pressure down :eek:

[Kontact]

to Merring..no issue with bill padding, just like I have issue with the client firing the attorney for doing it.

IMHO it's not cheating, nor dishonest, by any definition. They are simply doing what it takes to WIN. When success/mission accomplishment is on the line I expect people to do what it take to accomplish it (within pretty broad limits)without futzing about pie in the sky rules particularly no doping. Tis easier to be forgiveness than ask permission.

This isn't moral relativism, we all hove our morals/ethics to guide us. But we need to stop and consider others may not share those morals/ethics therefore don't judge others based on your values.
So if you win at chess by grabbing the other guy's queen when he's not looking, that counts as a "win"?

There is no such thing as "ethical relativism". Ethics and other rules exist to take the relative part out.

[Len J]

Novitsky is an agent for the FDA investigating the use of steroids in professional sports (why?). He was an IRS agent.

The USPS is an independent agency of the United States government-a quasi gov't agency. The USPS has become self-sufficient and has not directly received taxpayer-dollars since the early 1980s with the minor exception of subsidies for costs associated with the disabled and overseas voters. It's expenses are paid by the sale of postal products.

None of us have an action for fraud against Lance, USPS, Tyler or Floyd, etc.

It would be easier and cheaper to stop steroid use in sports, if that is indeed the goal, to go after the people selling the steroids and/or providing scripts for the steroids.

Going after the end users one by one is inefficient, wasteful, expensive and, in this case, meant only for headlines.


All the government subsidies are indirect..... http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/109xx/doc10975/84doc25c.pdf

Len

[Germany_chris]

So if you win at chess by grabbing the other guy's queen when he's not looking, that counts as a "win"?

There is no such thing as "ethical relativism". Ethics and other rules exist to take the relative part out.

For that given society you are correct, the problem is when you transplant that ethic, thats when the ethic becomes relative.

[JMerring]

For that given society you are correct, the problem is when you transplant that ethic, thats when the ethic becomes relative.

sigh. some things are immutable. don't kill, don't lie, don't cheat, don't steal, etc. pretty basic stuff.

[William]

IMHO it's not cheating, nor dishonest, by any definition. They are simply doing what it takes to WIN. When success/mission accomplishment is on the line I expect people to do what it take to accomplish it (within pretty broad limits)without futzing about pie in the sky rules particularly no doping. Tis easier to be forgiveness than ask permission.

This isn't moral relativism, we all have our morals/ethics to guide us. But we need to stop and consider others may not share those morals/ethics therefore don't judge others based on your values.

No, what you are talking about is a free-for-all, not a competition. If there were no "rules", there would be no testing, there would be no fines, there would be no one thrown out of a Grand Tours. I don't disagree that many of them are "doing what it takes to win", but it's still cheating if they break the rules that they have agreed to race to. They are still lying if they claim to the public that they race clean. "futzing about pie in the sky rules particularly no doping" is what has brought things to this point.




William

[Kontact]

For that given society you are correct, the problem is when you transplant that ethic, thats when the ethic becomes relative.
That's not correct by the definition of ethics, or by any normal person's understanding.

In any case, whatever you or LA think constitutes a "win", it isn't what the rest of us, the people that gave him $5 million or the UCI thinks, so it really doesn't matter if you want to exist in your own reality.

I think you're on your own.

[Aaron O]

That's it................ my hero is dead meat. Can't take it any more. Sold the Ottrott. Selling all the parts (see Classifieds). I'm no longer going to ride bicycles. At least not until we return from Bermuda in a couple of weeks.

Am thinking Tyler has less than no friends these days. And, what a huge waste of taxpayer dollars. Especially on what is such a minor sport in the U.S. We should be going after the pols who use taxpayer money to build sports stadiums, etc., for the rich. Only problem with that is they are the folks who write the rules allowing them to do so. Nothing like a stupid electorate (can you say 'tea party'?). :crap:

Seriously...we have the time to go after Lance Armstrong...and Barry Bonds, but the Nicotine execs who lied for decades roam free.

[Joachim]

Seriously...we have the time to go after Lance Armstrong...and Barry Bonds, but the Nicotine execs who lied for decades roam free.

:beer:

[Rueda Tropical]

It would be easier and cheaper to stop steroid use in sports, if that is indeed the goal, to go after the people selling the steroids and/or providing scripts for the steroids.

Going after the end users one by one is inefficient, wasteful, expensive and, in this case, meant only for headlines.

It does not look like they are going after users one by one. They are going after the most high profile, most sophisticated, biggest fish and are likely to bring down the entire network he built/utilized. That is likely to include suppliers, doctors, managers and regulators. The French, Swiss and Italian authorities may be bringing their own charges as they are now involved.

Headlines is part of the strategy when prosecuting abuses in any industry. High profile defendants bring more bang for the buck. After all prosecutions are meant to serve as examples meant to warn off potential offenders from engaging in similar behavior. Martha Stewart's prosecution for a $50,000 insider trade bought more attention to the subject then the prosecution of billion dollar insider trading scandals.

[William]

Seriously...we have the time to go after Lance Armstrong...and Barry Bonds, but the Nicotine execs who lied for decades roam free.

Freakin' A!! Get them to!!

But then again, this is a cycling forum. ;) :)




William

[fiamme red]

But then again, this is a cycling forum. ;) :)http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2095/1937925273_9d901d28c3_b.jpg

[zap]

The USPS is an independent agency of the United States government-a quasi gov't agency. The USPS has become self-sufficient and has not directly received taxpayer-dollars since the early 1980s with the minor exception of subsidies for costs associated with the disabled and overseas voters. It's expenses are paid by the sale of postal products.



If only that were true.

Anyhow, I say go after them........and check out the local USCF scene while you're at it.

[William]

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2095/1937925273_9d901d28c3_b.jpg


Wait!! Are butts PED's??? :confused:



William

[Aaron O]

Next shocking revalation...

NFL players are using growth hormones!

:rolleyes:

Wake me up when 60 Minutes exposes something that matters. If this is investigative journalism, there must not be anything going on more worthy of attention...like, say, Yemen falling.

[coylifut]

If it turns out that there's dirty doctors making piles of $ by illegally distributing these substances to the public, I think the FDA has a duty to act.

I understand that margins in the doc business are compressing, but I'm not for peddling EPO to athletes out the back anymore than I'm for illegally selling oxycontin to high school kids.

[BCS]

Next shocking revalation...

.
WWE...fake. Suspect many/most are juicing.

Yemen is going down, whatever, we've got Lance.
Syria is a mess but Assad is labeled a reformer

Cognitive dissonance......

[MattTuck]

If it turns out that there's dirty doctors making piles of $ by illegally distributing these substances to the public, I think the FDA has a duty to act.

I understand that margins in the doc business are compressing, but I'm not for peddling EPO to athletes out the back anymore than I'm for illegally selling oxycontin to high school kids.


Where the government spends the nation's finite resources reflects the priorities of its citizens. There will always be more that the government can do (ie. another wrong to be righted, and inequality to equilibrated, etc.) but the national priorities are getting out of whack with what the people really want.

The abuse of prescription pain killers is much more than a 'high school' issue, and in my opinion, should receive several million times more mind share and government resources than doping in cycling. That would be an underestimation of the proportional number of people being affected by prescription drug abuse.

There are organizations specifically devoted to keeping sports clean, whether they are effective is another story, but they exist. There is no reason the government should be involved in this.

Frankly, it sickens me and makes me wonder how our elected representatives and their appointees are going to get this country moving in the right direction. (not meant as a political view against the current or previous administrations, as this has been going on for decades).

[PaulE]

Wait!! Are butts PED's??? :confused:



William

Smoking will raise your hematocrit just like high altitude living/training. Your blood's going to be looking for all the oxygen it can suck out of your lungs can while they're being filled with cigarette smoke instead of clean air! Of course, harmful side effects may include (fast talking boilerplate language goes here).

[Rueda Tropical]

The abuse of prescription pain killers is much more than a 'high school' issue, and in my opinion, should receive several million times more mind share and government resources than doping in cycling. That would be an underestimation of the proportional number of people being affected by prescription drug abuse.

We have spent billions in the "war on drugs". All the money spent on doping in sports in the last 50 years is peanuts by comparison.

[97CSI]

climb,
Interesting reaction. My wife, a non-cyclist with no understanding of the story that went on, asked me, "do you think Lance doped?" I said, "yes, why do you ask?" She said, "because this guy on TV [we were watching Tyler last night] is lying about something. I don't know if it is about Armstrong, but he's lying about something."

That summarized my take watching him. I don't have any trouble believing LA broke rules (along with everyone else at the front of the peloton) it's just that Tyler has no credibility and with a book coming out, may have other motives for sensational statements.Went to the gym this a.m. One of the trainers is the once and future NJ state cycling champion. I ask for his opinion and he said almost exactly the same thing as your wife.

Am having trouble with the 'fraud' part of this. USPostal got more exposure and advertising with LA and the team then they could have ever have hoped for. Where's the problem? They are still getting tons of free publicity.

[97CSI]

We have spent billions in the "war on drugs". All the money spent on doping in sports in the last 50 years is peanuts by comparison.Huge waste of my tax-dollars in both cases.

Sorry to double-post, but using the iPad leaves little flexibility.

[93legendti]

[QUOTE=zap]If only that were true...QUOTE]

Sorry. It is:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Postal_Service
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Postal_Reorganization_Act

The Postal Reorganization Act of 1970 abolished the United States Post Office Department, a part of the cabinet, and created the United States Postal Service, a corporation-like independent agency with an official monopoly on the delivery of mail in the United States. Pub.L. 91-375 was signed by President Richard Nixon on August 12, 1970.[1]

The legislation was a direct outcome of the U.S. Postal Service strike of 1970.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/49061423/Postal-Reorganization-Act-1970

[dancinkozmo]

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2095/1937925273_9d901d28c3_b.jpg

is it just me or is that guy a dead ringer for a young sean connery ?

[bigflax925]

is it just me or is that guy a dead ringer for a young sean connery ?

No, it's not just you. I saw that resemblance immediately.

[Len J]

Am having trouble with the 'fraud' part of this. USPostal got more exposure and advertising with LA and the team then they could have ever have hoped for. Where's the problem? They are still getting tons of free publicity.

It's pretty simple really. They signed a contract in exchange for the support that said that they wouldn't do certain things with the money that was partially subsidized by the government....if they did those things, they were in violation of the contract. If the acts were illegal, they committed fraud.

len

[William]

http://www.elevengear.us/images/confections/pics/hincapie_lg.jpg

Veni, Vidi, Vomiti
The proud motto of the Anaerobian motherland! :D





W.

[Ozz]

is it just me or is that guy a dead ringer for a young sean connery ?
it is:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/willceemac/1937925273/

well, at least you weren't the only one who thought so!

:cool: ;)

[MattTuck]

We have spent billions in the "war on drugs". All the money spent on doping in sports in the last 50 years is peanuts by comparison.


I'm no advocate of the "war on drugs", and would like the record to reflect that. In fact, I'm not at all against legalizing many currently illegal drugs.

For the purpose of this discussion though, what I am advocating is that the wide spread abuse of prescription pain killers, which are LEGAL drugs by the way, require more resources to properly control their distribution. To give you an idea of the social costs of prescription drug abuse:

In 2000, about 43 percent of hospital emergency admissions for drug overdoses (nearly 500,000 people) happened because of misused prescription drugs. This type of drug abuse is increasing partially because of the availability of drugs, including online pharmacies that make it easier to get the drugs without a prescription, even for minors.

There may also be a perception, especially among younger people, that prescription drugs are safer than illegal street drugs. Most people don’t lock up their prescription medications, nor do they discard them when they are no longer needed for their intended use, making them vulnerable to theft or misuse.

In surveys, about 5% of Americans say they have used a prescription narcotic in the past month.

Another statistic pegs the number at 7 Million nonmedical users of prescription pain killers.

Both doping in cycling and abusing prescription painkillers are an inappropriate use of legal and life improving medicines. My contention is NOT that one is worse or better than the other, or that cyclists deserve a "free pass".

My viewpoint is simply from utilitarian ethics, "'to achieve the greater good for the most amount of people." With a limited pool of resources, our government's choices on how to use those resources indicates priorities. In the case of this procedure, I believe that resources would benefit a bigger number of people if spent somewhere else. Since the gist of the case is about using prescription drugs illegally, I think that efforts at ending abuse of prescription pain killers would be a more effective use of the scarce resources that we have.

It has nothing to do with the billions we have spent in the past, those are sunk costs. I'm talking about the choices we make today and in the future.

Every dollar we spend is a choice. My contention is: choosing to focus government resources and public energy on a peloton of ~3,000 racers world wide is a poor choice compared with the option of trying to fight the much more wide spread abuse of painkillers.

[rugbysecondrow]

It's pretty simple really. They signed a contract in exchange for the support that said that they wouldn't do certain things with the money that was partially subsidized by the government....if they did those things, they were in violation of the contract. If the acts were illegal, they committed fraud.

len

Folks have been saying this, can you link to the contract where it says this? Do we know that this was a stipulation of the contract? Also, you are assuming they used the USPS money for this. You are assuming the acts are illegal.

I have no problem having a discussion about some of this, but the base of facts are pretty fluid. After 9 pages of opinions, it is repetitive unless there are some actual facts to support them.

[BCS]

What % of hospital admissions do you think are attributable to tobacco use?

What % percent of motor vehicle accidents/domestic violence do you think are attributable to alcohol

[Fixed]

It would be easier and cheaper to stop steroid use in sports, if that is indeed the goal, to go after the people selling the steroids and/or providing scripts for the steroids.

Going after the end users one by one is inefficient, wasteful, expensive and, in this case, meant only for headlines.


good point
imho
cheers

[JeffS]

While it is a waste of taxpayer dollars and the electorate is generally stupid, the tea party comment makes no sense as they favor less government (among other things). The fact that Hincapie and grand jury appear in the same sentence equals too much govt.

You're right. We should just sit all the kids down now and tell them to start their injections early if they want to be a professional athlete. If you're not going to stop it, you might as well just make it mandatory and stop pretending.

[JeffS]

Both doping in cycling and abusing prescription painkillers are an inappropriate use of legal and life improving medicines. My contention is NOT that one is worse or better than the other, or that cyclists deserve a "free pass".

My viewpoint is simply from utilitarian ethics, "'to achieve the greater good for the most amount of people." With a limited pool of resources, our government's choices on how to use those resources indicates priorities. In the case of this procedure, I believe that resources would benefit a bigger number of people if spent somewhere else. Since the gist of the case is about using prescription drugs illegally, I think that efforts at ending abuse of prescription pain killers would be a more effective use of the scarce resources that we have.

It has nothing to do with the billions we have spent in the past, those are sunk costs. I'm talking about the choices we make today and in the future.

Every dollar we spend is a choice. My contention is: choosing to focus government resources and public energy on a peloton of ~3,000 racers world wide is a poor choice compared with the option of trying to fight the much more wide spread abuse of painkillers.


Who says this is a war on drugs?

Maybe this is a war to assure that your kid could be a successful athlete without taking drugs.

[fiamme red]

Who says this is a war on drugs?

Maybe this is a war to assure that your kid could be a successful athlete without taking drugs.Reminds me of a quote from the great mathematician Paul Erdös, who was addicted to amphetamines.

http://www.amphetamines.com/paul-erdos.html

In an article by Paul Hoffman published in November 1987, Atlantic Monthly profiled Erdös and discussed his Benzedrine habit. Erdös liked the article, "...except for one thing...You shouldn't have mentioned the stuff about Benzedrine. It's not that you got it wrong. It's just that I don't want kids who are thinking about going into mathematics to think that they have to take drugs to succeed."

[MattTuck]

Who says this is a war on drugs?

Maybe this is a war to assure that your kid could be a successful athlete without taking drugs.

Rueda Tropical did. In response to my first post, in which I advocated putting money spent on this prosecution toward ending prescription drug abuse.

Again, I'm not advocating doping. I'm saying that given finite resources, putting our country's resources into ending doping in sport is not the best use of that money.

If we were at peace, and everyone was healthy, fed, housed and employed and we had a tax surplus and zero national debt, then, yes, I could be convinced that that we need to worry about performance enhancing drugs in a sport 10 years ago....

I just think that a "war to assure that your kid could be a successful athlete without taking drugs" should be a pretty low priority compared to some of the actual problems this country has.

As far as the government's desire to be part of a 'clean' team... it reminds me of what they used to say about making a little money in wine business, start with a lot.

Best way to sponsor a cycling team with no doping on it, is not to sponsor a cycling team at all.

[coylifut]

looks like Lance's tea bagger defense is working.

This is prescription drug abuse. If the FDA can drill to the bottom, they may find the Oxycontin too.

[Kontact]

Best way to sponsor a cycling team with no doping on it, is not to sponsor a cycling team at all.
I didn't know all of pro cycling was on drugs. Should he USPS have known that?

[2dogs59]

Anybody heard from Chris Carmichael , Lances "main man" ? I am sure he knows something .....

[coylifut]

haven't heard much from Carmichael since he settled his case brought against him by two doped juniors at the Springs.

[MattTuck]

I didn't know all of pro cycling was on drugs. Should he USPS have known that?
:eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek:

You're joking. Right? The answer, if USPS did even a shred of due diligence before writing the check, is an unequivocal "yes".


http://www.active.com/Assets/Cycling/a2+migration/a2+temp/nts_cycling/0112_beloki.jpg


If you're not familiar with the haze that hung over cycling in the late 1990's, read about the Festina affair. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Festina_affair The likely reason Armstrong won his first tour in 1999 was precisely because the rest of the peloton was so decimated in the wake of that scandal (or 'protesting' it aka, didn't want ot get caught).

The general belief at the time, was that virtually all of the peloton doped. That is why sponsors put clauses into contracts so that they would be able to distance themselves in the event team members were busted.

[coylifut]

Neither of those two guys in that picture ever tested postive. Therefore, neither doped.

Who else stood next to LA on a TDF podium that either never tested positive or served a sanction?

Oh. and it should be pointed out that picture is from the 2000 tour. That's so funny. Lance won the 99 tour because the rest of the field was clean. That's a hoot.

[BCS]

Who says this is a war on drugs?

Maybe this is a war to assure that your kid could be a successful athlete without taking drugs.

Its always for the sake of the kids. Not until the sports themselves get tough on testing and lifetime bans for 1st offenders. Until then, let them juice all they want. I don't care, neither do my children who are all involved in sports. They are being taught not to dope by my wife and I. We don't need any help. Leave the parenting to the parents.

[Aaron O]

While it is a waste of taxpayer dollars and the electorate is generally stupid, the tea party comment makes no sense as they favor less government (among other things). The fact that Hincapie and grand jury appear in the same sentence equals too much govt.

Since when is the Tea Party anti-Government?

They're anti-abortion, and in favor of localized anti-abortion laws, they're in favor of federal bans on gay marriage, they absolutely support the tough on crime, war on drugs, more jails policies, they're pro-death penalty, they were behind federal laws banning local zoning restrictions on churches (until a mosque used the laws they passed) and their candidates push for business subsidies. Their main beef with federal law is that it restricts their ability to pass more restrictive local laws.

The Tea Party is anti-federal Government when it suits them to be and they make exceptions for the laws they want. It's a group completely devoid of consistent ideology and is essentially some ultra conservative social theory funded by the billionaire Koch family...whose father was a nut job Bircher. Some lunatics who inherited money from another lunatic funded a bunch of groups too stupid to understand where their economic interests lay...so you have poor and angry, largely unskilled, socially conservative dupes backing 1950s anti-flouride loons.

To give them credit for a thought pattern as consistent as anti-government is giving them far too much credit.

[Kontact]

:eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek:

You're joking. Right? The answer, if USPS did even a shred of due diligence before writing the check, is an unequivocal "yes".


http://www.active.com/Assets/Cycling/a2+migration/a2+temp/nts_cycling/0112_beloki.jpg


If you're not familiar with the haze that hung over cycling in the late 1990's, read about the Festina affair. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Festina_affair The likely reason Armstrong won his first tour in 1999 was precisely because the rest of the peloton was so decimated in the wake of that scandal (or 'protesting' it aka, didn't want ot get caught).

The general belief at the time, was that virtually all of the peloton doped. That is why sponsors put clauses into contracts so that they would be able to distance themselves in the event team members were busted.
I am aware of individual instances and scandals, but I was also aware of bans, testing and non-dope contracts. I think it is funny that you should think any potential non-cycling sponsor would be so conscious of the doping prevalence that you assume they are complicit, but the UCI talks about how the sport is clean.

Whether the USPS was aware of the level of the problem or not, they made it clear in their contract that it wasn't going to be tolerated, and the current investigation is a product of that.



It is painful reading this thread because it isn't about doping. It is about whether anyone should care or not. We're cyclists and racing fans - why should we not care what sort of crap is sticking to our sport? Who should pay for cheating, stealing or drug trafficking? Everyone who cheats, steals or traffics drugs. Saying that it is a waste of taxpayer dollars without proposing an alternative is pretty much turning a blind eye.

Here's an alternate solution: A class action suit by all the "clean" sponsors, host countries and anybody else with a stake against every team, doctor, rider, coach and whoever that made doping a reality. Civil suits have a lower burden of evidence, and bankrupting people does a great job of getting rid of them.

[djg21]

Would you have the same moral indignation if the drugs were decriminalized.

Just like heroin and crystal methamphetamine, the PEDs we are discussing are not now, and most likely never will be, anything except illicit when used to enhance athletic performance. They are extremely dangerous substances when abused.

[merlincustom1]

You had me until the fluoride :)



Since when is the Tea Party anti-Government?

They're anti-abortion, and in favor of localized anti-abortion laws, they're in favor of federal bans on gay marriage, they absolutely support the tough on crime, war on drugs, more jails policies, they're pro-death penalty, they were behind federal laws banning local zoning restrictions on churches (until a mosque used the laws they passed) and their candidates push for business subsidies. Their main beef with federal law is that it restricts their ability to pass more restrictive local laws.

The Tea Party is anti-federal Government when it suits them to be and they make exceptions for the laws they want. It's a group completely devoid of consistent ideology and is essentially some ultra conservative social theory funded by the billionaire Koch family...whose father was a nut job Bircher. Some lunatics who inherited money from another lunatic funded a bunch of groups too stupid to understand where their economic interests lay...so you have poor and angry, largely unskilled, socially conservative dupes backing 1950s anti-flouride loons.

To give them credit for a thought pattern as consistent as anti-government is giving them far too much credit.

[Pete Serotta]

Thanks.......Pete

[JMerring]

Like. A lot. We're getting dangerously close to 'lockerdown' time I suspect.

Since when is the Tea Party anti-Government?

They're anti-abortion, and in favor of localized anti-abortion laws, they're in favor of federal bans on gay marriage, they absolutely support the tough on crime, war on drugs, more jails policies, they're pro-death penalty, they were behind federal laws banning local zoning restrictions on churches (until a mosque used the laws they passed) and their candidates push for business subsidies. Their main beef with federal law is that it restricts their ability to pass more restrictive local laws.

The Tea Party is anti-federal Government when it suits them to be and they make exceptions for the laws they want. It's a group completely devoid of consistent ideology and is essentially some ultra conservative social theory funded by the billionaire Koch family...whose father was a nut job Bircher. Some lunatics who inherited money from another lunatic funded a bunch of groups too stupid to understand where their economic interests lay...so you have poor and angry, largely unskilled, socially conservative dupes backing 1950s anti-flouride loons.

To give them credit for a thought pattern as consistent as anti-government is giving them far too much credit.

[djg21]

Like. A lot. We're getting dangerously close to 'lockerdown' time I suspect.

This horse is thoroughly dead. Maybe it's time to lock this one down and we all can agree to disagree.

[1centaur]

Like. A lot. We're getting dangerously close to 'lockerdown' time I suspect.
Don't like. A lot. And piling on after Pete said no attacks was not sporting, in the relativist sense :)

OK, now we can lock it.

[roydyates]

Made by Amgen in Longmont, CO. Used by Cancer patients undergoing treatment as stated above.
Off topic but am I the only one who thinks it's funny that the Tour of California is sponsored by the manufacturer of EPO?

[Rueda Tropical]

:eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek:

You're joking. Right? The answer, if USPS did even a shred of due diligence before writing the check, is an unequivocal "yes".

Joking? There are still legions of people who think Lance is the exception to the rule and is clean now - even after all that's been testified to and published. But the USPS should have known better decades ago? Sure.

I thought the US riders were squeaky clean way back when. I thought it was the Euro's who had a culture of cheating. I cheered when Armstrong won and showed up Cofidis who dumped him when he got sick. I expect USPS thought about the same.

[1happygirl]

Off topic but am I the only one who thinks it's funny that the Tour of California is sponsored by the manufacturer of EPO?

Nope. My non cycling friend brought that out straight up. LOL

i heard someone on the web refer 2 george as Fred Flintcappie. LOL

Yeah havent heard much from Carmichael for about 5 yrs. yeah

[happycampyer]

Off topic but am I the only one who thinks it's funny that the Tour of California is sponsored by the manufacturer of EPO?Or that Viagra was the commercial sponsor for the Tyler Hamilton interview on 60 Minutes?

[Len J]

Folks have been saying this, can you link to the contract where it says this? Do we know that this was a stipulation of the contract? Also, you are assuming they used the USPS money for this. You are assuming the acts are illegal.

I have no problem having a discussion about some of this, but the base of facts are pretty fluid. After 9 pages of opinions, it is repetitive unless there are some actual facts to support them.

I'll have to search later......I think the prosecutor mentioned it when the grand jury was convened.

Len

[SoCalSteve]

Ok, so we did pretty great on this thread (for the most part). Hot topic for sure.

I think I will go with the "beating a dead horse" sentiment and close this thread.

If you guys arent through, start a new thread with the same topic. Maybe we can keep politics out of that one (even though I don't see how as this is all government fueled).

Thanks!