Welcome to NexusFi: the best trading community on the planet, with over 150,000 members Sign Up Now for Free
Genuine reviews from real traders, not fake reviews from stealth vendors
Quality education from leading professional traders
We are a friendly, helpful, and positive community
We do not tolerate rude behavior, trolling, or vendors advertising in posts
We are here to help, just let us know what you need
You'll need to register in order to view the content of the threads and start contributing to our community. It's free for basic access, or support us by becoming an Elite Member -- see if you qualify for a discount below.
-- Big Mike, Site Administrator
(If you already have an account, login at the top of the page)
Since he drowned (the US stripping him of his titles) so far looks like he must be witch. Guess there's always a career in curing warts.
ETA: Oops .... got that backwards. Since he drowned he's NOT a witch, so no Wart-B-Gone endorsement in the near future.
Might still qualify as lead in any movie version of Vonnegut's "Harrison Bergeron" where anyone with a shred of talent is handicapped one way or another to ensure they don't rise above the mediocrity of their bureaucratic overseers.
Can you help answer these questions from other members on NexusFi?
@RM99 I am not saying whether he did dope or not. I lean towards they all probably do it and it is not right and bad for sports in general. But I think only 1 or 2 guys with a bone to pick are willing to testify non anonymously. (at least this is my understanding someone correct me if I am wrong) So how can Lance defend against anonymous accusers? Do we allow the testimony of anonymous accusers in a real court of law? It is just not right. I also think it is ridiculous years later they are doing this no matter who comes forward. If guys are doping and they can't catch them then coming back years later is just wrong. The doping test should be the standard period not "so and so said but we can't tell you who so and so is but you can come to our arbitration where we have already proven you guilty".
The Department of Justice and looked at Armstrong and did not pursue charges apparently because the case would not hold up in a court of law. The USADA then picks it up and they are a joke on a witch hunt.
"The day I became a winning trader was the day it became boring. Daily losses no longer bother me and daily wins no longer excited me. Took years of pain and busting a few accounts before finally got my mind right. I survived the darkness within and now just chillax and let my black box do the work."
It's not anonymous accusers. At least 5 of his teammates have come out publicly against him and a couple of their spouses as well (who traveled on the tours with them).
Everyone knows he was doping. Everyone knows the sport is full of dopers.
I'm not saying he doesn't deserve the Tour Titles, what I'm saying is that the guy is a brainwashed arrogant fool who parades himself as being some champion to human endeavor and perseverence, when in reality, he's just a typical liar.
If I had to cheat to win, I wouldn't be running around attempting to be some bastion of virtue and character. I'd keep my mouth shut and hope no one ever dug into my closet.
"A dumb man never learns. A smart man learns from his own failure and success. But a wise man learns from the failure and success of others."
Long before the Velveeta Cheesy Skillet Smith coined the phrase, it was Armstrong who used the term "liquid gold" to describe their doping routine....which is where the spouses come in, it was their testimony/claim that he used the term all the time around them when referencing mandatory team doping sessions during the tour and training.
"A dumb man never learns. A smart man learns from his own failure and success. But a wise man learns from the failure and success of others."
Just what if he did not do it? Only absolute smoking gun would be the tests. I don't care if his Grandma said he did it only thing that should determine stripping titles and banning should be test results period. You do not have same recourse with the USADA that you would in a court of law if people accused you. It is a rigged court of opinion. This is a lopsided he said she said witch hunt. The tests should be the arbitrator.
Then comes the question who gives the USADA right to strip titles of an international race? No one that I am aware of.
Quote by Armstrong
“If I thought for one moment that by participating in USADA’s process, I could confront these allegations in a fair setting and — once and for all — put these charges to rest, I would jump at the chance,” Armstrong said. “But I refuse to participate in a process that is so one-sided and unfair.”"
"The day I became a winning trader was the day it became boring. Daily losses no longer bother me and daily wins no longer excited me. Took years of pain and busting a few accounts before finally got my mind right. I survived the darkness within and now just chillax and let my black box do the work."
Again, I cannot stress this enough. SOOO many athletes have been caught doping on a test and come to find out, they had been doping for YEARS. Marion Jones was never popped on a test, she was implicated through BALCO and never once came up hot on any of her tests and track and field has as strict, if not stricter testing than cycling.
"A dumb man never learns. A smart man learns from his own failure and success. But a wise man learns from the failure and success of others."
I understand that but because an organization like the USADA does not really follow due process giving someone a fair trail it should not be able to arbitrarily strip titles and ban an athlete based on testimony of someone else. It should be determined by the test alone. If the test did not catch them then so be it. I am sure those accused in Salem witch trials had multiple accusers saying they did it.
My point is not really whether he did it or not. The test said he did not do it which the entire cycling world relies on to determine guilt and a few people who have admitted to being personally involved in doping said he did do it. Admitted dopers given immunity accusing others. Can their testimony be relied on? Can you be 100% absolutely sure he did it? If you can't be 100% sure should not convict him because some said he did.
"The day I became a winning trader was the day it became boring. Daily losses no longer bother me and daily wins no longer excited me. Took years of pain and busting a few accounts before finally got my mind right. I survived the darkness within and now just chillax and let my black box do the work."
are professional athletes tested in the first place? Why should so called doping be against the rules and 2) why the hell are governments involved in that?
Well, that's simply a logic fail. Eye witness testimony is important no matter what the legal format, whether it be criminal court, civil court, abritration, mediation, etc.
This is like arguing that if you murder someone, the prosecution can only convict you if there's physical forensic evidence available....even if there's half a dozen witnesses.
Besides, one of the major allegations is that Armstrong did pop hot on a test and then donated a large sum of money to a European body in order to brush it under the rug. As you pointed out, it's not a criminal court, so like the NCAA, they have little to no warrant or subpoena power to summon records, etc.
I could dismiss one or even two teammates as being vindictive or jelous, but not 5.
"A dumb man never learns. A smart man learns from his own failure and success. But a wise man learns from the failure and success of others."
Because it creates an environment where the expectation is set that in order to win and succeed you have to dope just to be on a level playing field with everyone else.
Given that many of the banned substances being used are illegal without a licensed MD prescription and that any MD who prescribed these substances for non-medical purposes, that doctor would lose their license.
Additionally, the biggest reason government got involved is because HS athletes and minors were starting to buy PED's from back alley chemists, in order to give themselves what they perceived as a fighting chance....same with college.
The reason that it's also banned is because in REAL sports (not just for entertainment) you don't want a system where the guy who dopes the best or has the best doctor/drugs is successful.....you'd rather have it be about natural talent and hard work.
"A dumb man never learns. A smart man learns from his own failure and success. But a wise man learns from the failure and success of others."
