So who won the tour from 1999 to 2005

1 lurker | 80 watchers

Chrisull Aug 2012 11:25am, 25 Aug 2012 4,966 posts	0 Chrisull A lot of people seem to hate Kimmage, but really all he has been doing is pointing out the bleeding obvious and no-one wanted to know about that at the time.
Bazoaxe Aug 2012 11:50am, 25 Aug 2012 4,626 posts	0 Bazoaxe It feels like a witch hunt to me until the evidence is shown and. Cases proven I absolutely Agree that if guilty then the book should be thrown at him but let's prove guilt rather than assume because he won't defend himself It doesn't look good though which disappoints me.
Chrisull Aug 2012 12:02pm, 25 Aug 2012 4,967 posts	0 Chrisull The case is proven - read the Ashenden article. I've no axe to grind. I've read Armstrong's books, I watched all those tours, and loved it when the French got uppity about his dominance, his cancer charity work is amazing, but if you read Ashenden's evidence, and it's a open and shut case. There is no witch hunt. As Ashenden points out, not even the Soviet Union spiked other countries drug's samples during the height of paranoia. Why would US drugs testing go on a conspiracy to bring down one of its most iconic and respected sporting heroes? That is the only other explanation on the board for his failed EPO tests in 1999. Just because these tests were done anonymously and therefore can't be used in a court of law doesn't cut the mustard for me. That's a technicality, a loophole, not an indicator of evidence. The tests show clear indication Armstrong doped. Either the lab spiked his samples (which Ashenden considers, but shows how difficult it is to do, chance of 1 in 300 he estimates that they could have done this) or he , like nearly every other rider in the US Postal team, doped. I've read the Pantani bio that Matt Rendell goes into extreme detail of how Pantani must have been doping near his entire career. However Pantani only failed a drugs test right at the end. USADA have evidence that he doped on his comeback, using the bio-passport mechanism I suspect, and that I believe is going to be demonstrated over the next couple of years.
Chrisull Aug 2012 12:03pm, 25 Aug 2012 4,968 posts	0 Chrisull indicator of innocence not evidence (typo).
Stander Aug 2012 2:14pm, 25 Aug 2012 9,512 posts	0 Stander Just settled down to read the Times articles when boy decided to siddle up to me for a cuddle. I think he is going to fall asleep on me do it may be a while before I actually get to read the paper!
Stander Aug 2012 4:59pm, 25 Aug 2012 9,514 posts	0 Stander Finally got to read the Times reporting. Now I am less certain of his innocence. I guess only time will bring forth the real truth.
SPR Aug 2012 5:12pm, 25 Aug 2012 17,451 posts	0 SPR Stander - Have you also read the NYvelocity article I posted earlier about the 1999 EPO positives? UCI's response: velonation.com
The_Saint Aug 2012 5:30pm, 25 Aug 2012 5,379 posts	0 The_Saint I find the apparent gullibility of people in the poll on his guilt quite alarming, can I interest those people in an investment scheme?
JohnnyO Aug 2012 6:28pm, 25 Aug 2012 13,741 posts	0 JohnnyO There are now two issues, his guilt, and the question of whether he actually did it. One of these is now beyond doubt, he is guilty. Most of us think we know whether he did it or not, some are willing to reserve judgement. There will never be any incontrovertible evidence as far as I can tell, but for a man whose autobiography is all about fighting and never giving up, never resigning to what others thought he was and what he could achieve, his lack of fight on this issue is as close to an admission as we will ever get.
SPR Aug 2012 7:23pm, 25 Aug 2012 17,452 posts	0 SPR How do you get round the EPO in his samples in 1999?