or Connect
Cycling Forums › Forums › Bikes › Doping in Cycling › Latest Armstrong Lawsuit & doping
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Latest Armstrong Lawsuit & doping

post #1 of 21
Thread Starter 
Add this legal dispute to the growing list;

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/200...710/index.html

David Walsh

Pierre Balaster

The London Times

Emily O'Reily

SCA Event Insurance

Filippo Simeoni

Mike Anderson & androstenine discoveries & doping admission by Lance.

Add these legal actions to Greg lemond & former teammate Stephen Swartz who claim LA is an EPO user.

Add it to Lance's four junior teammates who are suing USA Cycling for doping them in 1990.

I think you have a solid case for doping.
post #2 of 21
Thread Starter 

Re: Latest Armstrong Lawsuit & doping

btw: This substance (Androstenine) that Mike Anderson claims to have found in Lance's bathroomin early 2004 is often used in conjuction with Nandrolone.

These products are fairly easy to detect in urine.

So, if Lance Armstrong is using what he keeps in his bathroom---and he has not failed a doping control since 1999, then he is, in fact not being tested whatsoever for anything.

One of my cycling firends (and former pro) told me, that the only activity going on inside a doping control tent---or van involving a TDF Champion---is an autograph session and reading a copy of USA Today.

Such are the dope-free perks of winning.

Again, business trumps Corinthean Sport.
post #3 of 21

Re: Latest Armstrong Lawsuit & doping

Flyer,
I am no obnoxious Lance fan (although I thoroughly enjoy watching him race), and don't have any firm stance on either side of the overall doping issue, but will you at least admit that there is little to no credibility involved in this latest allegation? Given the facts of THIS case (don't try to drag other issues into it) as we know them, can any intelligent person NOT see the lack of credibility here on the part of the accuser?

Feel free to rant on about all the things you are passionate about, but to include this latest case as more "evidence" only seems to weaken your argument, in my mind.

Am I to believe that I am "insulting Mike Anderson's intelligence" by being suspicious of him given the facts that we know? Please, that statement by him greatly insults MY intelligence...
post #4 of 21

Re: Latest Armstrong Lawsuit & doping

Quote:
Originally Posted by roadhog
Flyer,
I am no obnoxious Lance fan (although I thoroughly enjoy watching him race), and don't have any firm stance on either side of the overall doping issue, but will you at least admit that there is little to no credibility involved in this latest allegation? Given the facts of THIS case (don't try to drag other issues into it) as we know them, can any intelligent person NOT see the lack of credibility here on the part of the accuser?

Feel free to rant on about all the things you are passionate about, but to include this latest case as more "evidence" only seems to weaken your argument, in my mind.

Am I to believe that I am "insulting Mike Anderson's intelligence" by being suspicious of him given the facts that we know? Please, that statement by him greatly insults MY intelligence...

Exactly!

Dude, all I got out of this is that there is some guy trying to sue Lance and he is using any means necessary to win his case. This is by far the weakest allegation of the Lance Witch hunt that you have posted to date. Sorry, man, real weak.
post #5 of 21
Thread Starter 

Re: Latest Armstrong Lawsuit & doping

Maybe so. But is using steroid allegation more dishonest than is actually using them, but denying it.

Maybe Greg Lemond ought to be sued as well. He claims Amstrong admitted ot EPO use.

Why has not Amrstrong sued him?

Is that weak too?





Quote:
Originally Posted by snyper0311
Exactly!

Dude, all I got out of this is that there is some guy trying to sue Lance and he is using any means necessary to win his case. This is by far the weakest allegation of the Lance Witch hunt that you have posted to date. Sorry, man, real weak.
post #6 of 21

Re: Latest Armstrong Lawsuit & doping

Quote:
Originally Posted by Flyer
Maybe so. But is using steroid allegation more dishonest than is actually using them, but denying it.

Maybe Greg Lemond ought to be sued as well. He claims Amstrong admitted ot EPO use.

Why has not Amrstrong sued him?

Is that weak too?
Flyer , you need to post that article where Greg Lemond stated that Lance is a EPO user....... I need to see that ......
post #7 of 21
Thread Starter 

Re: Latest Armstrong Lawsuit & doping

Quote:
Originally Posted by wolfix
Flyer , you need to post that article where Greg Lemond stated that Lance is a EPO user....... I need to see that ......
Better go double strap in your cleats
before you pop out.

It has been posted several times already.

Limerickman has the post---exerpted quotations from David Walsh's book. Greg says more too.

Amazingly, while LA is presently involved with at least six (6) lawsuits---including Emily O'Reily--LA did not sue Lemond for libel. Why not?

Maybe Greg knows where both the bodies & drugs are buried? And maybe LA is just posturing for his sponsors benefit.

Gotta keep up a commercial image.

Take a page out of Kobe Braynt's life.

Lemond absence from a LA lawsuit is as suspicious as is LA & Chris Carmichael's absence from the 1990/1991 USCF/USA Cycling doping Juniors suit.

Sorry you cannot connect the dots.
post #8 of 21
Thread Starter 

Re: Latest Armstrong Lawsuit & doping

Greg Lemond, Emily O'Reily, Stephen Swartz, Lance's four Junior teammates, Michele Ferrari's conviction for malparatice and abuse of a pharmacist----and now Mike Anderson.

Oh yeah it's weak. One at a time---or in taken as a whole. The entire TDF scene changed from 1998. We went from 100% doped to ZERO in 11 months.
Then a cancer patient dominated the TDF for 6 six years--during which many deaths and doping discoveries occurred. (none at the TDF though)

The TDF is a commercial show---doping compliance is not part of it.


Lies are often more powerful than the truth.

The truth hurts and a lie feels good.

Just plan on discrediting lots of future doping news in 2005. It's going to be a busy year for disclosure.
post #9 of 21

Re: Latest Armstrong Lawsuit & doping

Sure sign of a troll: When asked to actually post a link to the story he keeps mentioning he doesn't do it, comes up with a bunch of BS instead. Everyone is laughing as your pathetic attempts to make everyone hate cycling.
post #10 of 21

Re: Latest Armstrong Lawsuit & doping

Flyer... Roadhog is right in my opinion. You can't use Anderson's statements as proof. Especially since he said that he put the vial back but Armstrong somehow knew afterwards? How? I doubt that he would remember where he'd left anything in his bathroom... My opinion is that the guy simply jumped on the wagon trying to squeeze a settlement out of Armostrong.

Quote:
Originally Posted by House
Sure sign of a troll: When asked to actually post a link to the story he keeps mentioning he doesn't do it, comes up with a bunch of BS instead. Everyone is laughing as your pathetic attempts to make everyone hate cycling.
Now, House, I could see someone accusing Flyer of trying to make everyone hate Armstrong but he is definitely not trying to make everyone hate cycling... Unless for you Armostrong is cycling.
post #11 of 21
Thread Starter 

Re: Latest Armstrong Lawsuit & doping

DV1976:

Yes, yes of course no 'proof' just lots of smoke. But you now have three people (Greg Lemond, Stephen Swartz & Emily O'Reily) who say LA deals in dope.

And we are not in court--only a Road Racing Post where folks who are passionate about cycling presumabley want the straight skinny, not silly commercial themes.

Lemond implied that LA said re: EPO use; "Everybody does it.' This implies LA personally.

Mike Anderson claims that these words were also used in a 2004 conversation with him re: recent doping busts; again with respect to doping; LA said; 'everyone does it'

Sounds like something I would say?


btw: Anderson claims to have found a box (not vials)
Vials would have been in the refrigerator---no mention of LA produce drawer---yet!

LA better hope Anderson did not photograph some of his medical kit.

Johan Museeuw kept his stuff at his veterinarian neighbor's----no possession charges for the old Lion King. Sadly, they did raid his neighbors house.

Now he has a 4-year ban.


Quote:
Originally Posted by DV1976
Flyer... Roadhog is right in my opinion. You can't use Anderson's statements as proof. Especially since he said that he put the vial back but Armstrong somehow knew afterwards? How? I doubt that he would remember where he'd left anything in his bathroom... My opinion is that the guy simply jumped on the wagon trying to squeeze a settlement out of Armostrong.

Now, House, I could see someone accusing Flyer of trying to make everyone hate Armstrong but he is definitely not trying to make everyone hate cycling... Unless for you Armostrong is cycling.
post #12 of 21
Thread Starter 

Re: Latest Armstrong Lawsuit & doping

Quote:
Originally Posted by House
Sure sign of a troll: When asked to actually post a link to the story he keeps mentioning he doesn't do it, comes up with a bunch of BS instead. Everyone is laughing as your pathetic attempts to make everyone hate cycling.
Go back and re-read limerickmans earlier post from LeMonde News re: the Lemond/LA cellular phone convesation.

I have reposted it yet again for you. Just more jealous lies which may be 100% accurate.

It is at the Indurain's Doctor says TDF is too hard.

Yet another jealous liar (cowardly little man). This sport is full of em. They are sooooo successful.
post #13 of 21

Re: Latest Armstrong Lawsuit & doping

Gosh, flyer refusing to post a link to the story...again. What a surprise.
post #14 of 21

Re: Latest Armstrong Lawsuit & doping

Quote:
Originally Posted by roadhog
Flyer,
I am no obnoxious Lance fan (although I thoroughly enjoy watching him race), and don't have any firm stance on either side of the overall doping issue, but will you at least admit that there is little to no credibility involved in this latest allegation? Given the facts of THIS case (don't try to drag other issues into it) as we know them, can any intelligent person NOT see the lack of credibility here on the part of the accuser?

Feel free to rant on about all the things you are passionate about, but to include this latest case as more "evidence" only seems to weaken your argument, in my mind.

Am I to believe that I am "insulting Mike Anderson's intelligence" by being suspicious of him given the facts that we know? Please, that statement by him greatly insults MY intelligence...
I would suggest you read very carefully Anderson's (the defendant) response to Armstrong (the plaintiff) - all 37 pages.

http://alt.coxnewsweb.com/statesman/...0105_lance.pdf

The action was initiated by Armstrong after Anderson preferred to avoid litigation by Armstrong fulfilling the precontract representation to employ Anderson. Armstrong has jumped in and brought it out in the open but on the expectation that impoverished Anderson could not fund a legal suit.

In my opinion, it has backfired on Armstrong and may be contributive to his upcoming public announcement before the Tour of Georgia. Anderson's lawyers have requested that the case go to a jury trial where the facts will be subject to examination and cross examination. The drug issue is only pertinent as it relates to the timing of Armstrong's change of behaviour towards Anderson and is relevant to the defence.
post #15 of 21

Re: Latest Armstrong Lawsuit & doping

Quote:
Originally Posted by VeloFlash
I would suggest you read very carefully Anderson's (the defendant) response to Armstrong (the plaintiff) - all 37 pages.

http://alt.coxnewsweb.com/statesman/...0105_lance.pdf

The action was initiated by Armstrong after Anderson preferred to avoid litigation by Armstrong fulfilling the precontract representation to employ Anderson. Armstrong has jumped in and brought it out in the open but on the expectation that impoverished Anderson could not fund a legal suit.

In my opinion, it has backfired on Armstrong and may be contributive to his upcoming public announcement before the Tour of Georgia. Anderson's lawyers have requested that the case go to a jury trial where the facts will be subject to examination and cross examination. The drug issue is only pertinent as it relates to the timing of Armstrong's change of behaviour towards Anderson and is relevant to the defence.
believe me, I don't care enough (nor have the time) to carefully read 37 pages of legal ease. I don't know if LA is doping or not, and don't spend much time thinking about it either. Nothing I can control either way. I ride my bike because I enjoy it and like endurance fitness. I am quite certain my amateur friends and club members with whom I ride are not doping, so I am happy.

My simple point is this: these two guys are in a bitter fight over money, essentially. And loe and behold now one of the two guys whips out other allegations as well. It's classic school ground argument tactics, and as such should be suspect.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Doping in Cycling
Cycling Forums › Forums › Bikes › Doping in Cycling › Latest Armstrong Lawsuit & doping