AP: Armstrong won't challenge doping allegations; loses Tour titles (Lance to confess)

[amm0409]

Which counts more in a court of law: A) Having various agencies coming into court and admitting 400 plus tests and never having a positive test or B) Having people caught cheating, say he was cheating.

Now, if the USADA has positive tests, they should produce that evidence. I think that's what people defending Armstrong would like to know. What's there actual evidence?
Also, there should be some acknowledgement that people shouldn't have to fight these charges for 20, 30 or 40 years or else they are guilty. He's been fighting them for 10-15 years already.

For me the answer is A) I guess if Im a lawyer

2nd
B) for me is its just other athletes, are they saying the truth or lying. Now if the eyewitnesses are of some sort of scientific other, physician etc... then that to me is a better eyewitness. Am I wrong?

and yes, if the USADA have positive tests then wheres the evidence.

anyways.....

[Trippster]

and who's to say he didn't beat the cheaters clean? Pretty easy to say he did, but will we ever know, all going to be opinions.

Im not going to say anything unless there is a fact he took steroids, sucks he doesn't want to stand up, but thats his decision.

Because the difference between doping and not is enormous. The first year of rampant doping was when Greg LeMond was entering his prime. He was a favorite to win it all when 20-30 riders suddenly became his superior.

[AsiaticSkinsFan]

a couple of writers who from Ireland who talk about Armstrong

http://www.rte.ie/sport/player/734/334783/

[mistertim]

Which counts more in a court of law: A) Having various agencies coming into court and admitting 400 plus tests and never having a positive test or B) Having people caught cheating, say he was cheating.

If there is no test evidence that he cheated but there is other evidence then the other evidence is still completely valid. The absence of a certain type of evidence doesn't invalidate the presence of other types. Again, back to the crime scene analogy. Should multiple witness testimonies be given little or no credence if there are no fingerprints or DNA found at the scene?

Now, if the USADA has positive tests, they should produce that evidence. I think that's what people defending Armstrong would like to know. What's there actual evidence?

Agreed about them releasing that info, if they have positive tests. To your second point...again, witness testimony IS valid evidence. Especially if it is multiple witnesses corroborating each other.

Also, there should be some acknowledgement that people shouldn't have to fight these charges for 20, 30 or 40 years or else they are guilty. He's been fighting them for 10-15 years already.

I do think that this is a sticky area as far as some sort of statute of limitations. However, the reason he has been fighting these charges for 10-15 years is that he has been accused of continuing to dope for his whole career, during those 10-15 years. Its not like there was one single incident where someone said he did it 15 years ago and that single charge has been set against him over and over. He has been accused multiple times by multiple people of doing it consistently over his entire career.

[amm0409]

Because the difference between doping and not is enormous. The first year of rampant doping was when Greg LeMond was entering his prime. He was a favorite to win it all when 20-30 riders suddenly became his superior.

So your sold on he doped and thats part of the reason he doesn't want to go to court? Wasting his time basically, he could possibly get off but he doesn't care? Maybe not going to court some how some way makes people take their own opinion because theres not a positive test? only way a positive test occur is in court "evidence"

[AsburySkinsFan]

Yep. Just made it up.
Just like all of Lance's teammates. All out to get him.
Everybody just hates Lance.
Come on. There is NO WAY Lance backs down if he didn't do drugs.

Really? Even IF he were to win his case are they going to reimburse him for his legal fees? You do realize how much it costs to fight at the level he was fighting right? Sorry, but this is a common tactic when faced with legal issues and being faced with draining your financial resources in order to maintain your innocence.
Corporations do it to people all the time.

....but you're right....there is no way he gives up....no feasible reason under the sun why he would cut his losses.

[brandymac27]

I don't know one way or another if he cheated. IMO, the bigger issue is his character in general. If he truly dumped Sheryl Crow when she had cancer (which I admittedly just found out about in this thread), that makes him a total douche IMO. Considering his own issues with cancer and cancer research, this is the act of of a total hypocrite and, well, douche bag. If he can be such a jerk to Sheryl, during a time when I'm sure she needed all the support she could get, it would't surprise me in the least that he would have other "character issues" that would include the use of PED's.

And as Katie alluded to, why would his own teammates admit to cheating with him unless they were all, uhmm, actually cheating????

[Hersh]

If there is no test evidence that he cheated but there is other evidence then the other evidence is still completely valid. The absence of a certain type of evidence doesn't invalidate the presence of other types. Again, back to the crime scene analogy. Should multiple witness testimonies be given little or no credence if there are no fingerprints or DNA found at the scene?

You ignored one MAJOR factor here. There is test evidence that he didn't cheat.

[mistertim]

Really? Even IF he were to win his case are they going to reimburse him for his legal fees? You do realize how much it costs to fight at the level he was fighting right? Sorry, but this is a common tactic when faced with legal issues and being faced with draining your financial resources in order to maintain your innocence.
Corporations do it to people all the time.

....but you're right....there is no way he gives up....no feasible reason under the sun why he would cut his losses.

You do realize that Lance Armstrong apparently has a net worth of $125 million, right? This isn't some schlub getting beat up on by a corporation for downloading music illegally. He has plenty of money. He ain't going to go broke by defending himself against this case. It would probably hardly even have made a dent in his finances.

You ignored one MAJOR factor here. There is test evidence that he didn't cheat.

A valid point and that would have to weigh against the other evidence they were presenting and how strong it was and how well it all corroborated. And Lance would have the chance to go in and contest their evidence and make his case about the evidence of him not doping vs the evidence they had. He decided not to.

[Hersh]

You do realize that Lance Armstrong apparently has a net worth of $125 million, right? This isn't some schlub getting beat up on by a corporation for downloading music illegally. He has plenty of money. He ain't going to go broke by defending himself against this case. It would probably hardly even have made a dent in his finances.

Dude,

Legal representation and all involved could easily run his bill into the tens of millions over 10-15 years.

[AsburySkinsFan]

Dude,
Legal representation and all involved could easily run his bill into the tens of millions over 10-15 years.

Yep, but apparently 10% of your net worth is ok to throw away fighting a witch hunt.
Companies settle out of court to avoid paying out legal fees etc for a tenth of that percentage.

[mistertim]

Dude,

Legal representation and all involved could easily run his bill into the tens of millions over 10-15 years.

$125 million is as of 2012 apparently. It doesn't seem like it has been killing him financially. Sorry but I find that, with the amount of money the guy is worth, the argument of "well he probably gave up because it was draining him financially" to be pretty weak. Especially considering how long he fought it and apparently didn't give a whit about how much it cost or who he had to go after. Now suddenly he is like "Oh, damn. THIS time it is going to be too much for me to afford. Better give up."?

[Elessar78]

Yeah, I agree with the others. F legacy. If he did it legit and he knows he did it legit, I might call it quits too. Save my money. His cycling life is over, now he can get on with whatever next chapter there is with a full bank account.

The hard evidence is in the samples. He beat other juiced up competitors up and down the mountain seven times, if that were the case. If it wasn't then he beat juiced up competitors without PEDs—that's an accomplishment.

---------- Post added August-24th-2012 at 01:14 PM ----------

I don't know one way or another if he cheated. IMO, the bigger issue is his character in general. If he truly dumped Sheryl Crow when she had cancer (which I admittedly just found out about in this thread), that makes him a total douche IMO. Considering his own issues with cancer and cancer research, this is the act of of a total hypocrite and, well, douche bag. If he can be such a jerk to Sheryl, during a time when I'm sure she needed all the support she could get, it would't surprise me in the least that he would have other "character issues" that would include the use of PED's.

And as Katie alluded to, why would his own teammates admit to cheating with him unless they were all, uhmm, actually cheating????

It's a ****ty thing to do but if it was going down hill before the cancer was revealed why would cancer obligate him to stay? If we get past the whole media thing, he's not the most glowing example of humanity. He left the mother of his kids?

I'm still not sure why society expects people who can run fast/ride fast/throw hard actually be good people? Society at large isn't really made up of good people, despite what they believe of themselves.

---------- Post added August-24th-2012 at 01:16 PM ----------

$125 million is as of 2012 apparently. It doesn't seem like it has been killing him financially. Sorry but I find that, with the amount of money the guy is worth, the argument of "well he probably gave up because it was draining him financially" to be pretty weak. Especially considering how long he fought it and apparently didn't give a whit about how much it cost or who he had to go after. Now suddenly he is like "Oh, damn. THIS time it is going to be too much for me to afford. Better give up."?

Maybe after spending $5 million so far and having nothing to show for it he decided that another $5 million would not do him much good either.

Would you rather spend $5 million to protect your name or have $5 million plus interest to give to your kids down the road?

[mistertim]

Maybe after spending $5 million so far and having nothing to show for it he decided that another $5 million would not do him much good either.

Would you rather spend $5 million to protect your name or have $5 million plus interest to give to your kids down the road?

I could understand this line of thinking more if he hadn't been so aggressive in defending himself over the past decade plus despite the monetary cost. I find the notion that he just suddenly now, on the eve of this particular investigation by a new body, decided that "eh, it's not worth the money anymore" and called it quits a bit dubious. After years of being incredibly aggro about defending himself to the point of lawsuits and borderline bullying? Yeah, a bit out of character.

[Hersh]

$125 million is as of 2012 apparently. It doesn't seem like it has been killing him financially. Sorry but I find that, with the amount of money the guy is worth, the argument of "well he probably gave up because it was draining him financially" to be pretty weak. Especially considering how long he fought it and apparently didn't give a whit about how much it cost or who he had to go after. Now suddenly he is like "Oh, damn. THIS time it is going to be too much for me to afford. Better give up."?

How long should he devote to this fight? 20, 30 years? The rest of his life? It's been 10-15 years already. It's very easy for us to say he should spend all this time and money defending himself because it's not our time or money.