Among Lance Armstrong's results likel...

Among Lance Armstrong's results likely to be stripped: 868th-place finish at 2006 NYC Marathon

There are 21 comments on the The Washington Post story from Oct 24, 2012, titled Among Lance Armstrong's results likely to be stripped: 868th-place finish at 2006 NYC Marathon. In it, The Washington Post reports that:

Lance Armstrong's results erased from the record books will likely include his 868th-place finish at the 2006 New York City Marathon.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at The Washington Post.

First Prev
of 2
Next Last
harvey

Columbus, OH

#1 Oct 24, 2012
All or nothing, meaningful or worthless. When you cheat, you lose....that's the message to Lance and to other dopers and cheaters, too.

End of story.

“Reality is better than truth.”

Since: Nov 09

Indianapolis

#2 Oct 24, 2012
Funny, they haven't proved he did anything wrong; they are going by statements made (coerced?) from riders who resent his success.

What's next--they gonna reinstate his cancer?
Gus

Vancouver, Canada

#3 Oct 24, 2012
Agree cpeter 1313...btw,I rode around the world in 80 days,wonder if anyone believes me...cheers!:)
harvey

Columbus, OH

#4 Oct 24, 2012
cpeter1313 wrote:
Funny, they haven't proved he did anything wrong; they are going by statements made (coerced?) from riders who resent his success.
What's next--they gonna reinstate his cancer?
Actually, they have proven it. Unless you're saying that multiple witnesses, including all of his USPS team, don't matter when making a decision?

I'm baffled as to why anyone's STILL defending him. Before the report? Sure. But now?

How?

“Reality is better than truth.”

Since: Nov 09

Indianapolis

#5 Oct 24, 2012
People lie--especially to save their own careers. They tested him after every win, and he passed. Period.
harvey wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually, they have proven it. Unless you're saying that multiple witnesses, including all of his USPS team, don't matter when making a decision?
I'm baffled as to why anyone's STILL defending him. Before the report? Sure. But now?
How?
Stephen

Uxbridge, UK

#6 Oct 24, 2012
cpeter1313 wrote:
People lie--especially to save their own careers. They tested him after every win, and he passed. Period.
<quoted text>
George Hincapie lied to save his career did he? funny. I thought he'd retired. I suppose Emma o' Reilly was lying to save her career too? hang on, she's a highly respected professional who doesn't work in cycling any more. and Betsy Andreu. she's not a cyclist. but I suppose they're all liars. except lance. as for him passing tests. READ THE REPORT YOU FOOL.
Actual Aussie

Tauranga, New Zealand

#7 Oct 24, 2012
cpeter1313 wrote:
People lie--especially to save their own careers. They tested him after every win, and he passed. Period.
<quoted text>
Not true. He failed several drug tests. One he got a 'post-dated' medical certificate, another he had lawyers bash the test into submission. His lawyer bill in defending himself against positive tests would have been in the millions.
The only sad thing is that it took so long. I bet you Jan wished he had Armstrong's lawyers, for he only failed 1 test after 12 years of drug cheating.
GeeMan

Glenrothes, UK

#8 Oct 24, 2012
Sportsmen/Sportswomen/Politici ans the difference is?

Where there is money and power there is cheating.

How do you fix the problem of doping/cheating in Sport?

“Reality is better than truth.”

Since: Nov 09

Indianapolis

#9 Oct 24, 2012
Some lie to save an active career; some fight to save their own reps. The bottom line is, if they knew this was happening, when did they decide to grow some ethics?

And, up yours, twit.
Stephen wrote:
<quoted text>
George Hincapie lied to save his career did he? funny. I thought he'd retired. I suppose Emma o' Reilly was lying to save her career too? hang on, she's a highly respected professional who doesing and said nothing, whnn't work in cycling any more. and Betsy Andreu. she's not a cyclist. but I suppose they're all liars. except lance. as for him passing tests. READ THE REPORT YOU FOOL.

“Reality is better than truth.”

Since: Nov 09

Indianapolis

#10 Oct 24, 2012
The only way you can beat a test in court is if the test is known to be unreliable or if it was given improperly.
Actual Aussie wrote:
<quoted text>
Not true. He failed several drug tests. One he got a 'post-dated' medical certificate, another he had lawyers bash the test into submission. His lawyer bill in defending himself against positive tests would have been in the millions.
The only sad thing is that it took so long. I bet you Jan wished he had Armstrong's lawyers, for he only failed 1 test after 12 years of drug cheating.
Actual Aussie

Tauranga, New Zealand

#11 Oct 24, 2012
cpeter1313 wrote:
The only way you can beat a test in court is if the test is known to be unreliable or if it was given improperly.
<quoted text>
Oh please, you must be really naive. There's a reason why professionals hire multiple top of the line lawyers if they can afford it, and that's because they make a massive difference. Only in Hollywood does the little guy win a legal battle against a top team.

And this doesn't account for the failed test where Armstrong got off with a post-dated medical certificate. Even without the other failed tests, he should have been banned for that one right then. But it was convenient for others to pretend.

Only the most dim naive person could possibly believe he wasn't a drug cheat; and there's more than enough red flags to show this even without heresay evidence. Lance Armstrong was a drug cheat.
Yates

Waikoloa, HI

#12 Oct 24, 2012
harvey wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually, they have proven it. Unless you're saying that multiple witnesses, including all of his USPS team, don't matter when making a decision?
I'm baffled as to why anyone's STILL defending him. Before the report? Sure. But now?
How?
I read the affidavits and reports. Still relies primarily on Andreu, Landis, and Hamilton. Other affidavits are full of "I heard Lance say X, which I understood to mean Y." Also such incriminating evidence is testimony that Lance showed up at races with a Thermos, which was allegedly proof positive of EPO use. And part of Hincapie's affidavit- after Lance vacated his apartment he was sent to make sure there were no drugs there, and there weren't! So wow that proves a lot, doesn't it? Taken as a whole, the report is overwhelming, but with each point examined alone or looked at with an eye for cross-examination of the witnesses, not quite so conclusive. I think he doped, and I found enough in the report to support that belief, but most of the people commenting on it haven't read all of it from a totally objective viewpoint.
Yates

Waikoloa, HI

#13 Oct 24, 2012
cpeter1313 wrote:
People lie--especially to save their own careers. They tested him after every win, and he passed. Period.
<quoted text>
some people defend because we realize that the tactics used to catch him are more threatening than the crime itself. The unbridled power of our federal government to pressure and coerce and be unrelentless. Hopefully Armstrong got what he deserved, but I don't think there are many of us who would be comfortable with those investigative tactics and pressure being used against us, be it auditing or IRS returns or belatedly pursuing a DWI conviction from our college days.
Yates

Waikoloa, HI

#14 Oct 24, 2012
cpeter1313 wrote:
Some lie to save an active career; some fight to save their own reps. The bottom line is, if they knew this was happening, when did they decide to grow some ethics?
And, up yours, twit.
<quoted text>
hincapie did retire from pro cycling , although he was allowed to compete this season even after he admitted doping with Lance. But Hincapie has a sportswear company and is trying to make a go of it as a motivational speaker and runs his own cycling development team, so he is far from retired from cycling.
serfs up

Melbourne, FL

#15 Oct 24, 2012
It is a shame because although cycling was not shown much on television, during a period of several years, people would tune in to the "Tour de France" if that was its name to watch this guy race against the snooty Europeans. They were pretty dominant in the sport over the decades and watching them get their just desserts was satisfying.

“Reality is better than truth.”

Since: Nov 09

Indianapolis

#16 Oct 25, 2012
Who's the little guy here? You think armstrong had more resources than the governing bodies involved? Ridiculous.

If it was convenient for them to "pretend" then, then it is unetical to be outraged now.
Actual Aussie wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh please, you must be really naive. There's a reason why professionals hire multiple top of the line lawyers if they can afford it, and that's because they make a massive difference. Only in Hollywood does the little guy win a legal battle against a top team.
And this doesn't account for the failed test where Armstrong got off with a post-dated medical certificate. Even without the other failed tests, he should have been banned for that one right then. But it was convenient for others to pretend.
Only the most dim naive person could possibly believe he wasn't a drug cheat; and there's more than enough red flags to show this even without heresay evidence. Lance Armstrong was a drug cheat.
Gus

Vancouver, Canada

#17 Oct 25, 2012
serfs up wrote:
It is a shame because although cycling was not shown much on television, during a period of several years, people would tune in to the "Tour de France" if that was its name to watch this guy race against the snooty Europeans. They were pretty dominant in the sport over the decades and watching them get their just desserts was satisfying.
...in the early days,we would get a mini clip here and there not enough to keep one glued to the Idiot Box,all of a sudden Americans were beating the Euros in their own game,USPS mesmorized fans,made it exciting and we were getting 2-4 hours every day,I doubt if this will ever happen again,oh well there's always ''I love Lucy'',by the way they make those who take PEDS appear to be Big Ogres,they were not doing Heroin,Meth and all that other Crap (except for for poor Pantani,who was consumed by Heroin,great entertainer R.I.P.) LIVESTRONG LANCE,thanx for excitement!
Actual Aussie

Tauranga, New Zealand

#18 Oct 25, 2012
cpeter1313 wrote:
Who's the little guy here? You think armstrong had more resources than the governing bodies involved? Ridiculous.

If it was convenient for them to "pretend" then, then it is unetical to be outraged now.
<quoted text>
These weren't well funded agencies we're talking about here. Armstrong's lawyer bill would have been larger than the entire anti-doping funding. If the agencies pushed, their pockets would have run dry every fast. The agencies took the survival option.

Yes it's slightly hypocritical for these agencies, but that shouldn't excuse doping, and to excuse Armstrong when he was never anything more than a high lawyered up drug cheat highlights questionable ethical values.

“Reality is better than truth.”

Since: Nov 09

Indianapolis

#19 Oct 25, 2012
Because armstrong was a multi-millionaire at the time, right?
Actual Aussie wrote:
<quoted text>
These weren't well funded agencies we're talking about here. Armstrong's lawyer bill would have been larger than the entire anti-doping funding. If the agencies pushed, their pockets would have run dry every fast. The agencies took the survival option.
Yes it's slightly hypocritical for these agencies, but that shouldn't excuse doping, and to excuse Armstrong when he was never anything more than a high lawyered up drug cheat highlights questionable ethical values.
Blacktigershark

Edmonton, Canada

#20 Jan 20, 2013
cpeter1313 wrote:
Because armstrong was a multi-millionaire at the time, right?
<quoted text>
cpeter1313...do you believe that everybody was lying about Armstrong NOW, and that Armstrong is NOT a cheater?

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 2
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Marathon Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Mysterious male 911 caller 'threatened further ... Sep 18 lgbt is silly 1
News Ultra-marathon runner reunited with missing str... Aug 27 Go Blue Forever 3
News The FBI director just painted a bizarre picture... Jun '16 Abrahammock Relig... 20
News Veteran marathon runner resumes his sporting fe... Jun '16 Fred 1
News When weird things happen, Olympians rely on men... May '16 Prosperity Fundie... 2
News 12-Year-Old Finishes Half-Marathon - by Mistake Apr '16 Wear Protection 13
News 17:04 Mark Wahlberg to shoot movie about Tsarna... Apr '16 Noyb 1
More from around the web