How can someone be "certain" he has doped, but he has NEVER failed a test? I don't think there has ever, in history, been an athlete under such a microscope. How could someone under such intense scrutiny pass every single test?

He has been consistent his entire career. No spikes, nothing-a steady achiever.

Anonymous wrote:I have to say it seems like a raw deal. And it also seems like so long ago, it's a witch hunt by whatever agency it s. and I was hell bent on hunting it all down in baseball, and have pretty much soured n baseball.

But in this case, don't care. Tl; dr. Didn't even read the posts in this thread. Seriously. Let it go.

You must care a little. You posted on this thread.

I have to say it seems like a raw deal. And it also seems like so long ago, it's a witch hunt by whatever agency it s. and I was hell bent on hunting it all down in baseball, and have pretty much soured n baseball.

But in this case, don't care. Tl; dr. Didn't even read the posts in this thread. Seriously. Let it go.

ugh, are there no pro sports with clean stars? It's disgusting to me that we have no one for our children to really look up to.

The entire sport at the international level is a complete fraud.

I think cycling has been corrupted beyond help at this point. My teenage nephew is a nationally-ranked cyclist, and I fear for his health as he gets older and sucked into this culture. Parents can only protect a child for so long, and when "everyone else" is doing it and seeing results (and only getting caught sometimes), even the stalwarts fall.

As for Armstrong, I agree that there's a compelling case against him. One big problem is that if they strip the top guy of his medals b/c of doping, the awards will then just go to the 2nd most successful doper.

Lance gets a good deal. He got to collect the money from all the sponsors and only has to give up the medals?
He already has made enough money to retire

PP again.
But, mostly, I just don't care anymore and this latest round of news about Lance makes me shrug and go back to whatever I was doing before.

I used to follow cycling and wished to go to the Tour de France someday. All the doping soured me on the sport. Yes, Barry Bonds and Lance Armstrong never failed a test and I am certain they both did PEDs, heavily.

Thank you for not using the defense lots of commenters have used at NYTimes: but everyone else was doping, too, and he still won, so that makes him special!

He was doping. It's disappointing, but that's sports culture. Hell, that's just culture now. Sports, school, finance - whatever it takes seems to bethe motto.

The case against Armstrong is compelling. His trainer, teammates and fellow cyclists all testify that they have 1st hand knowledge of his doping. He has failed tests before but has been able to appeal and cover up the results because of his status in the sport. As the pp suggested, the entire sport of competitive cycling is full of doping. Armstrong is a fraud.

He doped for 20 years, just like nearly everyone else in cycling. They had at least 10 former teammates who were eyewitnesses lined up ready to testify. They obviously had a very compelling case or he would not have given up his entire career and Tour victories. As for passing drug tests, he was simply better at it than others. I think it is still OK to admire him, but with your eyes open.

Apparently the USADA is claiming it has 10 former teammates who are prepared to testify that he was doping. These teammates might be able to shed light on why it is that this doping has not been caught in tests.

I think it's unfortunate that he's in a position where he either has to fight or essentially concede guilt, but that's where he is, and by not fighting, he looks like he has something to hide.

I totally agree. I do think there is something 'special' about him that he could do as well as he did but I think it's more a combination of working his ass off and determination. His training schedule was far more grueling than any other TdF competitor -- and it showed.

I just wonder if I am the only one who thinks Lance Armstrong is getting a raw deal. I am prepared to be corrected but as far as I know he has never tested positive for doping, even though the USADA has tested his blood samples over and over. Now, years after his Tour de France is over, they have continued to test and retest and have still found nothing but have decided to ban him and strip him of his titles. He has appealed it and I am sure doing so has cost him money and has had an emotional impact. Yesterday he decided to stop the appeals and the USADA is acting like it is an admission of guilt and even acting like they have proven he was doping. He has been banned for life and his titles will be stripped.

I just think this is the epitome of unfair. I am totally opposed to doping but only if it is actually happening. If it isn't, I think an athlete's performance should stand on its own. During the time he is accused of doping, many cyclists were caught and received punishment. But they haven't proven he did anything and he is getting punished too. I just think this whole thing stinks so bad. Am I missing something?