StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Remember when Armstrong was outed and there were arguments here between Armstrong apologists and those who felt he was guilty. Of course we now know he is guilty as sin. Despite having no interest in cycling, I freely admit I eventually became transfixed with the story.

http://docuwiki.net/index.php?title=The ... at_Nothing

This summarises the doco. Its currently screening on Australian television (but can be streamed online), don't know for how long so watch it now if you are interested in the Armstrong story.

http://iview.abc.net.au/programs/stop-a ... 006A001S00

I suspect those who aren't in Australia may need to use a VPN to access it. The documentary is compelling, especially since I was one of those arguing against Armstrong back in the day.

Thinking back, I don't think I ever felt a strong impulse to deny Armstrong's guilt, once evidence was revealed that he had in fact been doping. But I did feel a sense that he was being repeatedly tested and re-tested over the same allegations until he was caught, which struck me as something less than fair play.

It can be very hard to lay allegations to rest in the modern era, and Armstrong being guilty of something doesn't change that reality.

Simon_Jester wrote:Thinking back, I don't think I ever felt a strong impulse to deny Armstrong's guilt, once evidence was revealed that he had in fact been doping. But I did feel a sense that he was being repeatedly tested and re-tested over the same allegations until he was caught, which struck me as something less than fair play.

It can be very hard to lay allegations to rest in the modern era, and Armstrong being guilty of something doesn't change that reality.

That was Armstrong's lawyers at work. When an EPO test was available, his old samples were tested and the lit up like a Christmas tree. Unfortunately Armstrong's influence prevailed such that

a. the UCI let him off on a technicality - that is he didn't provide a B sample, even though it was several samples of urine which all came back positive
b. His lawyers sued so that information about these positive tests was kept mainly confined to France (ie it was published in a book and his lawsuits prevented it being published in his native US).

In fact I also had the same impression that Armstrong was retested and retested until something stuck. Until I read the USADA report.