Lance Armstrong to be stripped of Tour de France titles and banned from cycling

[marcshoe]

Originally Posted by oneupper

This is analogous the whole HOF debate. No one is sending Armstrong to jail. They are simply stripping him of honors/privileges which -after analyzing evidence- they decided that he doesn't deserve.

The courts acquitted the Chicago 8. Judge Landis banned them anyway. Good for him and good the cycling authorities.

So was Judge Landis related to Floyd?

Frankly, I think Armstrong's a hypocrite. As are we all, particularly those of us who hold people up as heroes because of their athletic acheivements. With Lance, the cancer complicated matters. He seemed more admirable, having shown a superhuman amount of courage. Yet the suspicion remained that the very disease he overcame was a consequence of his indiscretions.

This is a tragedy.

[Sea Ray]

Originally Posted by camisadelgolf

From reddit: if officials awarded Lance Armstrong's 2005 Tour De France title to the next fastest finisher who has never been linked to doping, they'd have to give it to the 23rd place finisher.

Just curious as I don't follow the sport, what did they do about awarding a champion after this ruling?

[camisadelgolf]

Originally Posted by Sea Ray

Just curious as I don't follow the sport, what did they do about awarding a champion after this ruling?

http://news.bostonherald.com/sports/...osition=recent

It makes for no easy choices for cycling’s authorities and historians.

The International Cycling Union, UCI, has control on the record books, but has declined to comment until it learns of the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency’s reasons for stripping Armstrong of his Tour titles on Friday. Tour organizers were even more mum, deferring to the UCI and USADA in a two-sentence statement.

It could take months, or years, to iron out. But a guessing game has already erupted about who will — or should — inherit Armstrong’s titles, and whether cycling chiefs might try to clean the slate once and for all.

. . .

"When he’s stripped of his titles — if they do — from Mr. Armstrong ... they’re not necessarily required to give them to someone else," he told France-Info radio. "It’s very clear that the titles of Tour de France champion mustn’t be awarded to people who faced suspicion that they were doped, or who were."

There's more in the article, but basically, it's tough to say right now. It could end up being nobody.

[NJReds]

Originally Posted by Sea Ray

Just curious as I don't follow the sport, what did they do about awarding a champion after this ruling?

I think they'll award the titles to these guys.

[texasdave]

Tyler Hamilton says Lance Armstrong gave him an illegal blood booster before the 1999 Tour de France and that the teammates took blood transfusions together during the cycling race the following year.

Read more: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/mor...#ixzz257Ww1NfT

Everyone cheated. I once read a book about this because I had Lance Fever back when he was winning all his Tours de France. Pretty much you had to cheat or you became irrelevant.

[savafan]

Originally Posted by texasdave

Read more: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/mor...#ixzz257Ww1NfT

Everyone cheated. I once read a book about this because I had Lance Fever back when he was winning all his Tours de France. Pretty much you had to cheat or you became irrelevant.

Is it considered cheating if everyone is doing it, or is it a level playing field?

[dougdirt]

Originally Posted by savafan

Is it considered cheating if everyone is doing it, or is it a level playing field?

Is it against the rules? If so, then it is cheating, even if everyone is doing it.

[savafan]

Originally Posted by dougdirt

Is it against the rules? If so, then it is cheating, even if everyone is doing it.

Who loses?

[dougdirt]

Originally Posted by savafan

Who loses?

The guys who aren't cheating. The sport in general.

[jojo]

Originally Posted by dougdirt

The guys who aren't cheating. The sport in general.

I think the prissy infighting is a much bigger turnoff.

[Mutaman]

Originally Posted by hebroncougar

Isn't it that same team you're bragging on that is all saying he was indeed, doping?

!. I'm not "bragging" on anyone, just pointing out a fact.

2. Where are they "all saying he was indeed, doping?". Link please.

3. What does one have to do with the other?

[Mutaman]

Originally Posted by Sea Ray

This is where I'm coming from. Since when are you guilty if you are 500-0 in drug tests but a few people "say" you did it?

OK, maybe he did, but if he passes the tests then he "wins" is the way I see it.

In the court of public opinion where hearsay evidence always rules the day.

[texasdave]

Lance Armstrong’s troubles continue. The city of Chicago won’t let Armstrong run in the city’s annual marathon set for October, reports ESPN.com.

Lance really pissed someone off. Seems petty to me.

[Mutaman]

"Lance Armstrong’s troubles continue. The city of Chicago won’t let Armstrong run in the city’s annual marathon set for October, reports ESPN.com."

I give up. Just another example of everyone jumping on the bandwagon, lack of imagination, and the media hype controlling all. Who made this decision?

[UKFlounder]

When he announced he was dropping the fight, I thought they said he would be banned from any event associated with the USADA, including triathalons he was starting to run and that this marathon has some sort of agreement with the USADA.

Originally Posted by Mutaman

"Lance Armstrong’s troubles continue. The city of Chicago won’t let Armstrong run in the city’s annual marathon set for October, reports ESPN.com."

I give up. Just another example of everyone jumping on the bandwagon, lack of imagination, and the media hype controlling all. Who made this decision?