Holy smokes. They just ruined Lance Armstong.

[JSD]

ESPN SportsCenter - USADA to strip Lance Armstrong of his 7 Tour de France titles, ban him from cycling for life

[indeedproceed]

ESPN SportsCenter - USADA to strip Lance Armstrong of his 7 Tour de France titles, ban him from cycling for life

I feel a lot about Lance Armstrong like i do about McGuire and Clemens (but not Bonds, although that's being a hypocrite and I know it):

What they did for the sport was huge, and you always 'kinda knew' that this stuff was going on. I don't see what airing this out now will help. Clemens/McGuire's grand jury, stripping Armstrong, Sammy Sosa's public flogging...

Don't see the point. Can't wait to find out in 2016 that Michael Phelps was using.

[Celts Fan 92]

Floyd Landis tried to tell us in 06 but nobody listened. Lance out chea wit da guilty conscious finally gave in his legacy took a hit man cuz he had dat nice story bout recovering from cancer but lyin cheatin nd covering up for a 10 year period when he was da sports biggest athlete aint a good look

[Bahku]

Mixed emotions about how this was handled on all sides, but it just plain sucks.

[KGs Knee]

I'm sure Armstrong's legacy will take a hit with this develoipement.  People will just jump to the conclusion he is automatically guilty.

For me personally, this does not change how I view Armstrong.  He is a cancer survivor, who overcame odds to become the greatest champion in the sport ever.  Even while surrounded by competitors constantly banned for failed tests, Armsrong never once tested positive.

Where is the blood evidence?  The USADA has been testing in conjunction witht he World Anti-doping agency for years.  This is not a situation similar to baseball where the atheletes were not tested at all.  Testosterone and HGH have been tested for, for some time now in cycling.

Maybe Armstong is guilty, maye he isn't.  A man deciding the fight is no longer worth it, does not equate to guilt for me.  He was the absolute best in a sport of cheaters.  Did he also cheat?  Reasonable suspiscion might say yes, empirical evidence (outside of testimony that is dubious) says inconclusive.

[fairweatherfan]

I feel a lot about Lance Armstrong like i do about McGuire and Clemens (but not Bonds, although that's being a hypocrite and I know it):

What they did for the sport was huge, and you always 'kinda knew' that this stuff was going on. I don't see what airing this out now will help. Clemens/McGuire's grand jury, stripping Armstrong, Sammy Sosa's public flogging...

Don't see the point. Can't wait to find out in 2016 that Michael Phelps was using.

I think the point is to show the next generation that even if they can hide PED use while they're in the sport, sooner or later it'll catch up to them.  It's intended as a deterrent as much as anything else.  "Intended" being the operative word, who knows if it'll work.

[guava_wrench]

This is a great development. Anytime people like Armstrong are exposed it is good news because it helps non-cheaters compete. It helps bring integrity to the sport.

This is a win for people who try to live their lives ethically.

Not that I care in particular since it is just biking.

[wahz]

All these years of clean tests and they use oral evidence to push them over the edge to do this? I think he cheated but I find it disgraceful to do this when there just isn't enough evidence

[KGs Knee]

Not that I care in particular since it is just biking.

It's not an overwhelmingly popular sport, that's for certain.

Honestly, while I feel Armstrong is getting a bad rap, I'm not really bothered by it any considerable manner.

[KGs Knee]

In my opinion, this reeks of being a PR move to salvage the sport.  It's very poorly calculated though.

While it might seem beneficial to take out the most popular athelete to ever grace the sport, in an attempt to show a "See, we ARE serious!" mentality, the sport itself it too sparsely followed to make a dent it it's perception though.  Atheltes will continue to find means to cheat the system.

The USADA still has no evidence other than third party testimony.  This reminds of a classic "witch hunt".

[Fafnir]

Every one of his major "rivals" had been taken down as a doper, was only a matter of time before they got him.

No way to beat an entire field of dopers being clean....

[Fafnir]

I'm sure Armstrong's legacy will take a hit with this develoipement.  People will just jump to the conclusion he is automatically guilty.

For me personally, this does not change how I view Armstrong.  He is a cancer survivor, who overcame odds to become the greatest champion in the sport ever.  Even while surrounded by competitors constantly banned for failed tests, Armsrong never once tested positive.

Where is the blood evidence?  The USADA has been testing in conjunction witht he World Anti-doping agency for years.  This is not a situation similar to baseball where the atheletes were not tested at all.  Testosterone and HGH have been tested for, for some time now in cycling.

Maybe Armstong is guilty, maye he isn't.  A man deciding the fight is no longer worth it, does not equate to guilt for me.  He was the absolute best in a sport of cheaters.  Did he also cheat?  Reasonable suspiscion might say yes, empirical evidence (outside of testimony that is dubious) says inconclusive.

When you don't show up to court to defend yourself "because its too hard" that means you are guilty or lose the case.

You can't whine about the summary judgment against you after the fact. (or before the fact in Armstrong's case)

[KGs Knee]

I'm sure Armstrong's legacy will take a hit with this develoipement.  People will just jump to the conclusion he is automatically guilty.

For me personally, this does not change how I view Armstrong.  He is a cancer survivor, who overcame odds to become the greatest champion in the sport ever.  Even while surrounded by competitors constantly banned for failed tests, Armsrong never once tested positive.

Where is the blood evidence?  The USADA has been testing in conjunction witht he World Anti-doping agency for years.  This is not a situation similar to baseball where the atheletes were not tested at all.  Testosterone and HGH have been tested for, for some time now in cycling.

Maybe Armstong is guilty, maye he isn't.  A man deciding the fight is no longer worth it, does not equate to guilt for me.  He was the absolute best in a sport of cheaters.  Did he also cheat?  Reasonable suspiscion might say yes, empirical evidence (outside of testimony that is dubious) says inconclusive.

When you don't show up to court to defend yourself "because its too hard" that means you are guilty or lose the case.

You can't whine about the summary judgment against you after the fact. (or before the fact in Armstrong's case)

When the USADA can produce evidence, other than dubious testimony from competitors who lost to him (teammates are still his competitors), I'll believe them.  Perception is in the eye of the beholder.

This isn't "real" court.  He is not required to attend.  I can't believe anyone would honestly believe an individual not showing up for such a financially coslty hearing for something as arbitrary as sport is inherently guilty.

Why should Armstrong continue to spend his own money on a fight when the other side has vastly more money?  Hardware and legacy?  The loss of hardware can never take the memories from him.  He knows the truth, it's his conscious.  His legacy is still that of a cancer survivor, and humanitarian.

You can add cheat to that if you want.  I'd like to actually see some legitimate evidence before I condemn a man.

[LooseCannon]

Maybe we can make some comparisons between diehard Lance Armstrong supporters and diehard Joe Paterno loyalists.

[KGs Knee]

Maybe we can make some comparisons between diehard Lance Armstrong supporters and diehard Joe Paterno loyalists.

Wow!

How the two are even comparable is unfathomable.   That is quite the reckless statement.

Cheating in sport and child abuse are definitely similar