If he never tested positive, how do they have proof?
I don’t know. Maybe they kept samples that could be later tested with more sophisticated tests.
If he never tested positive, how do they have proof?
Have followed and partissipated in endurance sport for more than sixty years, and I have been pretty sure that Armstrong used some type of tetesteron doping in the late 1990s and he tested positive in two tests in 2009 and 2010, but he managed to bribe some officials, donating over 100 000 $ and they hid the tests and didn’t release the resaults, but as always, somebody found out, in this case, a french news paper, anyway, lots of info on this out there
See, that is the thing I keep asking and no one has an answer.
Is that how it works now? "Oh, you are guilty cuz we say so, case closed!"
If they have evidence then produce it but otherwise how can this be anyway legal and ethical?
And my theory is if they do have proof then he should get his title revoked but in my book "he said/she said" ain't proof! Mainly because in this day and age anyone with the dough can buy any testimony they want. I still think the French have it in for Armstrong and hate it an American won 7 times and would do anything to wipe out that record including paying people to deal the dirt!
If he never tested positive, how do they have proof?
This is Harry Reid’s Amerikka, where you don’t need no steenkin proof. You are guilty of the accusation until you prove you are innocent. Maybe not even then.
By refusing arbitration, they can't release the proof that they've shown Armstrong.
One presumes that's why he's letting it go.
LLS
Their proof is allegations by some who knew Armstrong. Those people might have personal reasons for making the allegations.
I think what Armstrong said is that he’s tired of the enormous investment of time and money in defending what seems to be a never-ending prosecution. IIRC, he’s already beat this rap in at least 2 other investigations.
Several witnesses supposedly. I would like to hear detail on how and what he did to beat the tests.
Can't imagine he would quit fighting if innocent.
In Obama's America, proof is not needed. The allegation is enough.
I don’t understand it either. It seems they have just harrassed him to the point that he is willing to walk away.
How could he prove that he wasn’t doping anyway?
I hope this decision can be reversed somehow.
I don't know, it's just one of those things. If you're an American and you dominate a European sport for so long, you're obviously doing it illegally........
I don't need Lance Armstrong to have a cabinet full of medals for me to know that he is one of the greatest cyclists of all time.........
With this latest news, it's easy to forget that the Europeans have been the most blatant abusers of illegal sports enhancement drugs and have continuously been busted for it.
Armstrong was one of the most heavily and frequently tested cyclists in the world and never once proved positive............That's all I need to know.
They don't, it all comes down to testimony from malcontents......
The unidentified witnesses said they knew or had been told by Armstrong himself that he had "used EPO, blood transfusions, testosterone and cortisone" from before 1998 through 2005, and that he had previously used EPO, testosterone and Human Growth Hormone through 1996, USADA said. Armstrong also allegedly handed out doping products and encouraged banned methods - and even used "blood manipulation including EPO or blood transfusions" during his 2009 comeback race on the Tour.