Lance Armstrong stripped of his 7 Tour de France titles

[El Kabong]

I read some articles from the links provided in this thread.

Ten "team mates," numerous doctors, journalists that were friends with him and people that worked for him all said he was doping. Now surely he must have been an unbelievable scumbag for that many close aides to lie about him.

Barry Bonds never failed a drug test apparantly (I don't even know who that is) and there is ZERO evidence Margarito ever fought a single bout with loaded gloves.

Yes but he was caught ATTEMPTING to fight with loaded gloves

[Fenster]

I read some articles from the links provided in this thread.

Ten "team mates," numerous doctors, journalists that were friends with him and people that worked for him all said he was doping. Now surely he must have been an unbelievable scumbag for that many close aides to lie about him.

Barry Bonds never failed a drug test apparantly (I don't even know who that is) and there is ZERO evidence Margarito ever fought a single bout with loaded gloves.

Yes but he was caught ATTEMPTING to fight with loaded gloves

Yes but that still doesn't mean he used loaded gloves. (maybe he did in the past but there's no EVIDENCE)

Lance Armstrong never failed a drug test yet everyman and his dog that knew him says he was a drugs cheat.

[Andre]

I dont know innocent or what? But like everything else Margaritto included; if he was innocent and wanted it proven beyond public doubt, he would sit his own lie detector test. He'd be screaming for one right about now.

[TitoFan]

Well..... here's an inkling as to how the U.S. public is reacting to Lance's misfortunes:


Livestrong donations skyrocket in wake of Lance Armstrong’s decision to stop fighting charges | The Lookout - Yahoo! News

[Fenster]

"Drugs or no drugs," Matthew Serge wrote on Twitter, "anyone that raises $500 million to fight cancer is cool by me."

That there sums it up.

He had cancer and raised money for charity so his "possible cheating" should be given the spanish archer. Cheating at sport doesn't make you a peado. It just means you didn't win fair and square. That's it.

[TitoFan]

I'm glad you said "possible cheating". 'Cause there's been no documented proof that Lance ever used PEDs. And given the way you defend Margarito after he was caught intending to cheat... I'm sure you'll avoid the double-standard.

[Cressa121]

I'm glad you said "possible cheating". 'Cause there's been no documented proof that Lance ever used PEDs. And given the way you defend Margarito after he was caught intending to cheat... I'm sure you'll avoid the double-standard.

Rightfully, there are a lot of questions over Armstrong though.

In the 1999 tour he tested positive for corticosteroids, but it was overturned after he produced a prescription for it.

When his frozen samples from '99 were tested in '05 for EPO, which wasn't something that was tested for at the time, they came back positive.

One of his old team mates, Tyler Hamilton, also said Armstrong failed a test at the 2001 Tour de Suisse - for EPO - but the UCI helped brush it under the carpet. The director of the lab that carried out those tests told the FBI that he met with the UCI to discuss the positive test and was told that it wasn't to go any further.

Doping was rampant in cycling in that time and with the amount of people willing to testify that they saw him use drugs, or used drugs alongside him, and the reports above, he has a lot of questions to answer imo.

Unfortunately he's chosen not to answer them.

[Fenster]

I'm glad you said "possible cheating". 'Cause there's been no documented proof that Lance ever used PEDs. And given the way you defend Margarito after he was caught intending to cheat... I'm sure you'll avoid the double-standard.

Actually I think you're the one verging on the "double-standard." My views haven't even come close it.

You are defending Armstrong with "he never failed a test," therefore the dozens of associates claiming he cheated are lying and it's a huge conspiracy against him.

I've never claimed Margarito did not load his gloves. I only know that there's no evidence he ever fought with loaded gloves.

I find it hard to understand how you can so confidently see one man as guilty and the other innocent? Is it really as simple as - you like Armstrong but dislike Margarito?