There are many great features available to you once you register at Neowin, including:

  • Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the front page
  • Access to a great community, with a massive database of experience on hard & software issues, gaming and recreational activities, and more
  • Access to the Neowin IRC - you could make a friend from across the world and talk to them live
  • Access to Neowin contests & subscription offers and forums that are not open to guests/li>
  • It's simple, and FREE! · Register here

Lance Armstrong stripped of all seven Tour de France wins by UCI


 Share

Recommended Posts

Lance Armstrong stripped of all seven Tour de France wins by UCI

Lance Armstrong has been stripped of his seven Tour de France titles by the sport's governing body.

The International Cycling Union (UCI) has accepted the findings of the United States Anti-Doping agency's (Usada) investigation into Armstrong.

UCI president Pat McQuaid said: "Lance Armstrong has no place in cycling. He deserves to be forgotten."

McQuaid added Armstrong had been stripped of all results since 1 August, 1998 and banned for life.

On what he called a "landmark day for cycling", the Irishman, who became president of UCI in 2005, said he would not be resigning.

"Cycling has a future. This is not the first time cycling has reached a crossroads or that it has had to begin anew," he said.

"When I took over [as president] in 2005 I made the fight against doping my priority. I acknowledged cycling had a culture of doping. Cycling has come a long way. I have no intention of resigning as president of the UCI," McQuaid said.

"I'm sorry that we couldn't catch every damn one of them red-handed and throw them out of the sport at the time."

Armstrong, 41, received a life ban from Usada for what the organisation called "the most sophisticated, professionalised and successful doping programme that sport has ever seen".

The American, who overcame cancer to return to professional cycling, won the Tour de France in seven successive years from 1999 to 2005.

He has always denied doping but chose not to fight the charges filed against him.

Usada released a 1,000-page report earlier this month which included sworn testimony from 26 people, including 15 riders with knowledge of the US Postal Service Team and the doping activities of its members.

Usada praised the "courage" shown by the riders in coming forward and breaking the sport's "code of silence".

Armstrong, who retired in 2005 but returned in 2009 before retiring for good two years later, has not commented on the details of Usada's report. His lawyer Tim Herman, however, has described it as a"one-sided hatchet job".

Source: BBC Sport

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow. The last I heard they said he was going to be allowed to keep his wins... I am glad to see that wasn't the case. Honestly, anyone that does this doesn't deserve to be able to keep their wins.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, where's the "it's just USADA, they don't have any power and it doesn't mean anything" choir now ?

No, people were saying they don't have the power to strip Armstrong of his titles, the UCI does and until the USADA release all their evidence it means nothing.

They have, and Armstrong is a cheat on an astouding level and UCI have stripped him of his titles.

Now we have to see how if the UCI was in on it or just complacent. I think this story has a way to go yet.

This is a good read from someone who refused to take drugs in cycling. Good guy.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/cycling/19930514

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Charisma, it's not all a lie. He still beat other people who "cheated". In my opinion, and I now this isn't shared by everyone, I think doping should become legal and call it a day. As a viewer that just wants to be entertained (and I stress that), I'd much rather watch people doing extraordinary feats.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can't believe how many of them followed along with him. It's a real disgrace to the sport.

It makes me wonder about Wiggins too - however, Contador (and Froome, it he goes to a different team) will make the Tour interesting to watch next year. I love staying up to view the mountain stages - the scenery is wonderful.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Charisma, it's not all a lie. He still beat other people who "cheated". In my opinion, and I now this isn't shared by everyone, I think doping should become legal and call it a day.

By allowing doping you effectively make it impossible for anyone not doping to compete. If all you care about is entertainment then go watch Honey Boo Boo but I don't want to see international sport turned into a competition to see who can inject the most dangerous substances into their bodies without stroking out. If that's what you consider "entertainment" then that's very sad.

honeyboobookrangninjatu.jpg

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

How is it fair? they had a witch hunt, and he just gave up dealing with their bs any longer.

He's still a hero.

Or perhaps he knew they had him dead to rights and a long drawn out battle would not change the outcome but would do further damage to his public image and tank his LiveStrong foundation/endorsements? He certainly is quite the hero for proving he was the best doped to the gills guy of them all, his EPO was just a cut above the rest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My question still stands to whether they actually had any physical proof. For the past 10 years, it's always been a group of washed-up cheaters that have been trying to bring Armstrong down with only "their word" as their proof. In my opinion, that's a bunch of BS.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well if he was so doped, then they could've easily came up with actual proof.

it's all bs.

They have financial records, testimony from teammates, anecdotal evidence (skipping practice when drug tests were due), tests that indicated he was on hormones (these failed to be reproduced which is highly unusual, suggesting collusion with anti-doping employees), a test that was positive for EPO (single test, so not admissible for anti-doping but valid in federal court), emails, he gave up contesting the charges, etc. Due to the nature of doping it's very difficult to obtain absolute proof but the evidence is overwhelmingly against him.

Occam's razor dictates that it is more likely he is guilty than the victim of a massive conspiracy. Nobody can speak with absolute certainty but it's naive to believe his word against the testimony of dozens of teammates and other evidence.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So hang on, what happens to records of the previous Tours then? Since Lance never 'won' them anymore, do the record books say 'No winner' since the winner isn't reassigned, or something else? I'm wondering about this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I couldn't see a decision like this being made lightly and without recourse so if the evidence against him is as telling as it seemed I believe the right decision has been made. Cheating in sport should be punished with lifetime bans and nothing less in my opinion.

And from what I can gather the options to both re-assign the wins to someone else or declare them as having no winner are open.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

They have financial records, testimony from teammates, anecdotal evidence (skipping practice when drug tests were due), tests that indicated he was on hormones (these failed to be reproduced which is highly unusual, suggesting collusion with anti-doping employees), a test that was positive for EPO (single test, so not admissible for anti-doping but valid in federal court), emails, he gave up contesting the charges, etc. Due to the nature of doping it's very difficult to obtain absolute proof but the evidence is overwhelmingly against him.

Occam's razor dictates that it is more likely he is guilty than the victim of a massive conspiracy. Nobody can speak with absolute certainty but it's naive to believe his word against the testimony of dozens of teammates and other evidence.

Also the fact he beat dopers in the races. Someone clean wouldn't be able to do that so convincenly.

I know he was amazing to watch and a great hero but he is a fraud now. The time to defend him is over, people are starting to sound like the wife who defends her partner even though he beats her.

I don't think they should even bother awarding the titles to other riders, you just can't be sure during that time and way before that. Just take the black mark on cycling history and start now, clean and lean.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well if he was so doped, then they could've easily came up with actual proof.

it's all bs.

Tests weren't good enough back thn, and it's a really hard doping method to detect to start with.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Charisma, it's not all a lie. He still beat other people who "cheated". In my opinion, and I now this isn't shared by everyone, I think doping should become legal and call it a day. As a viewer that just wants to be entertained (and I stress that), I'd much rather watch people doing extraordinary feats.

Well, I thought about it a bit and you're partially right. He did still beat others who cheated, and it still took a lot of hard work and discipline--I mean, I could take the same drugs and I couldn't just go and win this thing, it takes a lot more. But it's still 1) cheating with an added edge, and 2) against the rules.

But I disagree with your second point. This is about more than just entertainment, it's a competition and people take it seriously, especially when you factor in the prizes they receive and the records that are set. It's not just about what you and I want to see--if you just want to see people doing crazy extraordinary things, there are other programs on TV for that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

By allowing doping you effectively make it impossible for anyone not doping to compete. If all you care about is entertainment then go watch Honey Boo Boo but I don't want to see international sport turned into a competition to see who can inject the most dangerous substances into their bodies without stroking out. If that's what you consider "entertainment" then that's very sad.

I think a more appropriate option (as Andy Parsons said on Mock the Week) would be to separate the dopers into their own categories. Let them have their own events and records. I'm a firm believer in natural selection; if someone wants to deliberately screw up their bodies, let them. The gene pool needs a little chlorine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, I thought about it a bit and you're partially right. He did still beat others who cheated, and it still took a lot of hard work and discipline--I mean, I could take the same drugs and I couldn't just go and win this thing, it takes a lot more. But it's still 1) cheating with an added edge, and 2) against the rules.

There's no doubt that even as a cheater he was a great athlete and an incredibly dedicated individual. You can't simply inject a few substances into your body and win international competitions. However, the rules are absolutely explicit when it comes to cheating being unacceptable, and both morally and legally he was wrong to do so. He committed fraud and that shouldn't be tolerated and certainly shouldn't be idolised.

I think a more appropriate option (as Andy Parsons said on Mock the Week) would be to separate the dopers into their own categories. Let them have their own events and records. I'm a firm believer in natural selection; if someone wants to deliberately screw up their bodies, let them. The gene pool needs a little chlorine.

Unfortunately that won't stop cheating and it will take away advertising from the true sportsmen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share