http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20050823/sp_nm/cycling_armstrong_dc

By Patrick Vignal
Tue Aug 23, 9:53 AM ET

PARIS (Reuters) - Seven-times Tour de France winner Lance Armstrong has denied ever taking performance-enhancing drugs following a report in French newspaper L'Equipe that he had used the blood-boosting drug EPO.

Tour de France executive director Jean-Marie Leblanc said he felt let down by Armstrong after L'Equipe alleged the American had taken the banned drug in 1999, the year he first won the world's greatest cycle race.

Armstrong, who recovered from testicular cancer to become the most successful rider in the Tour's history, has been forced to rebut several doping allegations during his career and he repeated on Tuesday that his sporting successes were 'clean'.

"I will simply restate what I have said many times: I have never taken performance-enhancing drugs," the 33-year-old, who retired in July, said in a statement on his personal website.

L'Equipe, saying it had access to laboratory documents, reported on Tuesday that six of Armstrong's urine samples collected on the 1999 Tour de France showed "indisputable" traces of EPO (erythropoietin).

L'Equipe published what it claimed to be a results sheet from the laboratory which appeared to show six figures revealing traces of EPO. The newspaper also published documents from the French cycling federation showing exactly the same figures under Armstrong's name.

The Chatenay-Malabry lab said in a statement that the samples they tested did not have names attached and they could not confirm if any of the samples were Armstrong's.

TEST RESULTS

The lab said all test results had been sent to WADA, the agency in charge of the fight against doping in world sport, on the condition they did not use them to take disciplinary action.

Despite the lack of proof and Armstrong's denials, cycling officials expressed disappointment.

"I remain cautious and slightly circumspect but this is troubling and I feel disappointment inside me, like many sports lovers must do," Leblanc told French radio station RTL

Asked if he felt let down by Armstrong, Leblanc said. "Yes."

International Cycling Union (UCI) president Hein Verbruggen told Reuters: "We have to wait and see if this is true.

"Only then will we be able to ask ourselves whether there should be any legal action and whether this is a further blow for cycling.

"I have to say this is not pleasant but, for the moment, it only involves Lance Armstrong and France."

There were no tests to detect EPO, a drug that increases the level of red blood cells and endurance, in 1999.

However, samples from the 1999 Tour were kept and have been recently retested by the specialist anti-doping laboratory in Chatenay-Malabry outside Paris.

The World Anti-doping Agency (WADA)-accredited lab, which developed the test to detect EPO, started retesting last year samples that had been taken between 1998 and 1999 and frozen. The new tests were part of a scientific research programme.

CANCER FIGHT

A spokesman for WADA said the latest research results from the French laboratory had arrived at the Montreal-based organization on Monday.

He said that like the lab, WADA had no means of matching names to the samples and this could be done only by the French cycling federation, the French sports ministry or the UCI.

Despite being in a class of his own in recent years, Armstrong could never win over French fans or journalists. "LA Confidential," a book on his life containing accusations of doping, was published on the eve of the 2004 Tour.

The leader of the U.S. Postal team, which became the Discovery Channel team this year, he lost a Paris court case in 2004 when his request that the controversial book should include his denial of drug-taking was turned down.

"To all the cynics, I'm sorry for you," Armstrong said after his final Tour triumph in July. "I'm sorry you can't believe in miracles. This is a great sporting event and hard work wins it."

Armstrong said in his statement of denial on Tuesday: "Unfortunately, the witch hunt continues and (L'Equipe's) article is nothing short of tabloid journalism.

"The paper even admits in its own article that the science in question here is faulty and that I have no way to defend myself.

"They state: 'There will therefore be no counter-exam nor regulatory prosecutions, in a strict sense, since (the) defendant's rights cannot be respected."'

The American retired after winning his record seventh Tour de France in July. Before winning his first Tour in 1999, Armstrong won a battle against testicular cancer, undergoing two operations and four bouts of chemotherapy.

Since retiring the Texan has concentrated on supporting the fight against cancer, pressing President Bush to boost spending on research.


I know that this sounds like a repeat of the same old story, but it seems this time that people are taking this a little more seriously than usual.

But I wish they would finally find out the truth of these allegations. Did he or did he not take performance enhancing drugs? And why did they withhold any type of disciplinary action back in 1999?

Chris

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20050823/sp_nm/cycling_armstrong_indurain_dc

France out to get Armstrong for years, says Indurain
Tue Aug 23,12:54 PM ET


MADRID (Reuters) - Five-times Tour de France winner Miguel Indurain says the accusations of doping made by sports newspaper L'Equipe against Lance Armstrong are part of a campaign designed to discredit the American rider.

"They have been out to get him in France for a number of years," Indurain was quoted as saying on the website todociciclismo.com on Tuesday.

"He's the one who knows about it, but it seems wrong that they are starting to dig over tests from years ago.

"It's all very strange and I don't know to what extent it is legal to keep specimens like this."

L'Equipe, saying it had access to laboratory documents, reported on Tuesday that six of Armstrong's urine samples collected on the 1999 Tour de France showed "indisputable" traces of EPO (erythropoietin).

There were no tests to detect EPO, a drug that increases the level of red blood cells and endurance, in 1999.

However, samples from the 1999 Tour were kept and have been recently retested by the specialist anti-doping laboratory in Chatenay-Malabry outside Paris.

SEVENTH TIME

Armstrong, who won the Tour for the seventh time in succession this year, has denied ever taking performance-enhancing drugs.

Indurain, who won the Tour five times in succession between 1991 and 1995, raised doubts about the testing procedure.

"Anything about Armstrong is news these days, but the question is whether all this is true or not. There are question marks over the reliability of the test (for EPO) and there are a lot of doubts about the whole thing."

Germany's Jan Ullrich, the 1997 Tour de France winner, told German television: "I heard about it, but these are speculations so you can't really say anything about it. It's been six years, and, if it's true, I would of course be disappointed.

"But I can't say anything on it right now. Lance is the greatest of our time and maybe somebody's trying to put him down. I don't know what it's about, so all of this is very speculative."

Swiss Alex Zuelle, who finished second behind Armstrong in the 1999 Tour, told Reuters: "I won't say anything about it because my career as a professional is over.

"I'm not Armstrong. All of this is speculation. Sometimes they have proof, then they haven't ... I'm not interested in it anymore.

"For me, the Tour is over and done with; it's just too many years back."


This story adds a few more details.

Chris

This is a witch hunt by a country that is pissed at him winning "their" event 7 years in a row. F the French.

This is a witch hunt by a country that is pissed at him winning "their" event 7 years in a row. F the French.

Agreed. I honestly don't know if the guy cheated or not, but they tested the hell out of him and never caught him. Now they are going to come back and say his 1999 samples are proof. I'm sure the French would never tamper with those samples in any way just to get the guy. :rolleyes: They have tried to get him for everything from taxes to drugs. It's sad to see how petty a little country France is.

I claim BS here. If this happened in 1999, why wasn't he suspended at all? Why was he allowed to continue to win 6 more Tours..... witch hunt is the best analogy out there.

okay so he maybe did it in 99, still what explains the dominance of the last 6 YEARS?!?! This is BS...give it up France, you were dominated by a superior athlete

the frence love lance. he has raised the profile of the tour in the US, and that has not gone unnoticed.

the frence love lance. he has raised the profile of the tour in the US, and that has not gone unnoticed.

They why continue persecuting him? They've had a vendetta against him every since he won the 2nd title. It's sad, really.

I claim BS here. If this happened in 1999, why wasn't he suspended at all? Why was he allowed to continue to win 6 more Tours..... witch hunt is the best analogy out there.There were no tests to detect EPO, a drug that increases the level of red blood cells and endurance, in 1999.

However, samples from the 1999 Tour were kept and have been recently retested by the specialist anti-doping laboratory in Chatenay-Malabry outside Paris.

The World Anti-doping Agency (WADA)-accredited lab, which developed the test to detect EPO, started retesting last year samples that had been taken between 1998 and 1999 and frozen. The new tests were part of a scientific research programme. <b></b>

okay so he maybe did it in 99, still what explains the dominance of the last 6 YEARS?!?! This is BS...give it up France, you were dominated by a superior athlete

Ditto.

They why continue persecuting him? They've had a vendetta against him every since he won the 2nd title. It's sad, really.


It's just a newspaper who's against him. The rest of France is ok with him winning so many tours.

This is a guy who had CANCER. So he has more red blood cells. Big fucking deal. C'mon people. Or allow me to cut your nuts off and see how you compete. -ohbfrank-

This is a guy who had CANCER. So he has more red blood cells. Big fucking deal. C'mon people. Or allow me to cut your nuts off and see how you compete. -ohbfrank-

He wouldn't have to worry about lower sperm count anymore from the bike seat :p

It's just a newspaper who's against him. The rest of France is ok with him winning so many tours.

It sounds like some of the cycling authorities there have it out for him too. The French public seems to like him though. A poll had them rate Armstrong as the greatest Tour de France rider ever.

taken from: http://www.velonews.com


Top lab official questions L'Equipe conclusions
By Charles Pelkey
news editor, VeloNews
This report filed August 23, 2005
The director of Canada's top anti-doping laboratory on Tuesday said she had "serious concerns" over doping allegations raised in a four-page story in the French sports daily L'Equipe.

Doctor Christiane Ayotte, director of the Doping Control Laboratory at Montreal's Institut National de la Recherché Scientifique, said that the L'Equipe story, outlining charges that seven-time Tour de France winner had used EPO at the 1999 edition of the race, raised several important scientific and ethical questions, beginning with the assertion that France's anti-doping lab had tested frozen urine samples five years after the fact.

"We are extremely surprised that urine samples could have been tested in 2004 and have revealed the presence of EPO," Ayotte said in an interview with VeloNews on Tuesday. "EPO - in its natural state or the synthesized version - is not stable in urine, even if stored at minus 20 degrees."

Scientists at the French national doping laboratory at Châtenay-Malabry developed the urine test in 2000 as a means of combating EPO use among endurance athletes. The test measures the electrical charge of isoforms released by the body. Isoforms resulting from naturally occurring erythropoietin have a distinctly different pattern of electrical charges than do those that result from the use of artificially produced erythropoietin.

Ayotte, director of the World Anti-Doping Agency-certified lab closest to WADA headquarters in Montreal, questioned the assertion of Doctor Jacques de Ceaurriz, director of the Châtenay-Malabry lab, who said that his method for detection of EPO is "absolutely reliable," even if the sample is five years old.

"One of two things happens," De Ceaurriz said. "Either EPO, which is a protein, degrades as time passes and becomes undetectable. In that case we have a negative test result or, as in this case, the EPO persists as it is. We have therefore no doubt about the validity of our results."

Ayotte, who has not had the opportunity to speak with De Ceaurriz since publication of the L'Equipe story, said that there would have been no logical reason for the lab to have held on to the samples without testing them for as long as it has.

"The lab in Paris, which originally developed the test, would have - should have - retested these samples in 2000 or 2001, in order to develop and validate their methods at the time," she said. "My interpretation is that retesting itself must have been conducted in 2000 or in 2001, but the results were reviewed using the new mathematical model that is now being developed in Paris."

Ayotte explained that as part of WADA's efforts to "harmonize" testing protocols among anti-doping laboratories worldwide, the Paris lab had created the model to allow the application of "qualitative rather than quantitative" standards when interpreting test results.

"That has to be the only explanation, because otherwise, I've been a liar all these years," Ayotte said. "I have been instructing everyone at all of the organizations not to expect to reproduce an EPO adverse finding if more that two or three months has elapsed since the sample was originally taken."

Ayotte noted that earlier standards had called for the application of a "hard-number" interpretation of results, meaning that if a certain percentage of isoforms were positively or negatively charged, a result would be deemed to be an indication of EPO use. Ayotte said research subsequent to the development of the test has suggested that testers understand the reasons behind the formation of positive and negative isoforms and "recognize the presence of distinct populations in a sample."

The development of that model, said Ayotte, may have prompted researchers at Châtenay-Malabry to go back and review existing data - which should include data from the retesting of '99 Tour samples - and apply them to the new model. Suggesting a more recent test, she said, "really makes me wonder."

"EPO is a protein hormone and it is not stable in urine, even when kept frozen," she said. "This has long had implications for any plan we've had to keep samples and specimens for long periods of time with the hope that we might, some day, retest those samples for a new substance."

Ayotte said that procedure aside, the Armstrong story in L'Equipe also raises a critical ethical question raised by the release of such data, without the possibility of follow-up tests.

"I am very worried about the circumstances about the way such information might have been leaked," Ayotte said. "We are fully allowed - and it is our duty - to investigate samples to make sure that if there is an adverse finding, it is properly reported. In this case, however, the director of the laboratory acknowledges that it cannot be deemed a doping offense because 1) the athlete has retired and 2) he is placed in a situation where there is now way to have the sample re-tested or verified."

"It seems to me," Ayotte continued, "that this whole thing is breach of the WADA code. We are supposed to work confidentially until such time that we can confirm a result. By no means does this mean that we sweep a result under the carpet, but it has to meet a certain set of requirements."

Ayotte said that the lab itself isn't facing questions in the matter.

"It isn't the lab that has the critical bit of information - the link between the code on the sample and the name of the athlete," she noted. "We only get a code at these WADA labs. Someone else must have supplied the paper with the names and their respective codes. So, to me, this whole thing raises a number of questions. I'm worried, because I have a great deal of respect for my colleagues in Paris. I am concerned that they did not cover their backs before being dragged into a very public issue of this kind."

Fucking French.

Why would he cheat? I mean, he just rides around on a bicycle. It's not like he's a REAL athlete or something. -ohbfrank-

I hope Lance sues and puts this all to rest...the problem being that French judges are probably equally partisan. Lance recently had his libel case againt the author of "L.A. Confidential" (not the crime thriller) in a French court because the judge stated that the accusations made in the book did not constitute libel.

So, let me get this straight: the most famous athelete in a sport infamous for drugs, whose entire income and career are based on his reputation is accused of being a doper and legally doesn't have the ability to defend himself in a French court? Explain that one again?

Meanwhile a French self-admitted "dopeur", Richard Virenque, remains a national hero in France. It's a nation populated solely by assholes, I tells ya.

Meanwhile a French self-admitted "dopeur", Richard Virenque, remains a national hero in France. It's a nation populated solely by assholes, I tells ya.

Most would argue that in general the European public likes him or at least respects him. It is largely the press (which supposedly speaks on behalf of the people) that gives the appearance that he is disliked.

It's really just sensational journalism to sell copies and incite people.

It's just a newspaper who's against him. The rest of France is ok with him winning so many tours.

That's funny. This guy seems to have been accusing him too: http://sports.yahoo.com/sc/news?slug=ap-armstrong-doping&prov=ap&type=lgns

sore loser -ohbfrank-

Apparently, the Tour Director is saying Lance Armstrong owes everyone an explanation. Why does he owe anyone an explanation, if they had proof he was cheating and didn't tell it to the public, do they not owe us an explanation? This is such a shame, i just hopw this never tarnishes lance's amazing feat.

I think the simple fact here is they can't be 100% sure the alleged sample is even Lance's. Since that's the case, this story is just that; a story.

I love how the French will jump on anything, true or not, to try and take away Lance's amazing achievements. Their economy is in the toilet, their government is in the toilet, and now their pride is in the toilet. Couldn't happen to better people.

On a side note, I'm very impressed by Indurain's comments through this. He has a perfect chance to make little comments about how Lance has cheated and therefore Lance's record isn't as solid as Indurain's, but instead he defends him. Once again, Indurain shows what a class act he is. Compare that to Greg Lemond, who has been bitching about Lance from day one because he was sore about not being the only American to have won the tour anymore. Seriously, I saw one interview with Lemond where he basically said his hunting accident was more devesating than Lance's cancer, so Lemond's victory was actually more impressive.

On another note, they did note that the DNA in the urine cells matched the real killer DNA in the OJ case.

On another note, they did note that the DNA in the urine cells matched the real killer DNA in the OJ case.

So the Juice juices?

I love how the French are making it easier and putting up reasons for people to bash them. You ask for it.

Apparently its a "proven scientific fact", whatever

http://sports.espn.go.com/oly/news/story?id=2141710

If he did it then screw him.

I love how the French will jump on anything, true or not, to try and take away Lance's amazing achievements. Their economy is in the toilet, their government is in the toilet, and now their pride is in the toilet. Couldn't happen to better people.

Couldn't have said it better myself. Don't get me wrong - there are a lot of nice people there, as during my 5 week stay there I found nothing but kindness - but they aren't necessarily the smartest bunch in the world.

Fucking frogs.

I wonder what would happen if someone posted a racist remark against another race or nationality. Somehow I think the moderators would step in.

I love how the French are making it easier and putting up reasons for people to bash them. You ask for it.

That's funny, terrorists say the same thing.

Well, I remain convinced that drugs, etc. should be allowed in sports because I want to be entertained, dammit. But I seem to be a lone voice. :(


And Lamond is an ass.

That's funny, terrorists say the same thing.
:hscratch:

I wonder what would happen if someone posted a racist remark against another race or nationality. Somehow I think the moderators would step in.


Call me crazy, but calling someone a Frog and using the "N" word to describe an African American are in two entirely realms of scope.

The French are not a "race."

I could care less about the opinions of Hitler's Bitch.

The French are not a "race."
But the Tour de France is!

Or something. I got nothing....

The French are not a "race."

Nor are the fucking Jews, but I'm guessing that's not an OK expression.

I don't like the French much either, but the continual French bashing is making people seem pathetic. Let it go.

I just thought he was making a play on the phrase Lance uses that was cited in the book Lance Armstrong's War by Daniel Coyle. Lance refers to the people bent on tarnishing him and attacking him as "fucking trolls".

The book is a really good read and anyone who wants a look inside professional cycling would enjoy it. Not being intimate with the scene I can't vouch for its accuracy.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20050825/ap_on_sp_ot/cyc_armstrong_doping

Armstrong: Cheating Remarks 'Preposterous'
By JIM LITKE, AP Sports Columnist
3 minutes ago

Lance Armstrong went on the offensive Wednesday, saying it was "preposterous" for the Tour de France director to suggest the legendary cyclist "fooled" race officials and the sporting world by doping.

Comments by Tour director Jean-Marie Leblanc appeared in the French sports daily L'Equipe on Wednesday, a day after the newspaper reported that six urine samples provided by Armstrong during the first of his seven Tour championships in 1999 tested positive for the red blood cell-booster EPO.

"I actually spoke to him for about 30 minutes and he didn't say any of that stuff to me personally," Armstrong said, referring to Leblanc.

"But to say that I've fooled the fans is preposterous. I've been doing this a long time. We have not just one year of only 'B' samples; we have seven years of 'A' and 'B' samples. They've all been negative," he said during a conference call from Washington.

In his comments to L'Equipe, Leblanc sounded convinced that Armstrong was guilty of doping, saying the onus was on him to explain the newspaper's findings.

"For the first time — and these are no longer rumors, or insinuations, these are proven scientific facts — someone has shown me that in 1999, Armstrong had a banned substance called EPO in his body," Leblanc told the newspaper.

"The ball is now in his court. Why, how, by whom? He owes explanations to us and to everyone who follows the tour. Today, what L'Equipe revealed shows me that I was fooled. We were all fooled."

The Tour did not respond Wednesday to a request by The Associated Press to interview Leblanc.

The tour director was hardly the only target of Armstrong's ire Wednesday. He also questioned the validity of the science involved in testing samples that were frozen seven years ago and how those samples were handled since. He also charged officials at the suburban Paris laboratory that processed them with violating the World Anti-Doping Agency code by releasing the results to the newspaper.

"It doesn't surprise me at all that they have samples. Clearly they've tested all of my samples since then to the highest degree. But when I gave those samples," he said, referring to 1999, "there was not EPO in those samples. I guarantee that."

Fellow cyclists came to Armstrong's defense Wednesday.

"Armstrong always told me that he never used doping products," five-time winner Eddy Merckx told Le Monde newspaper. "Choosing between a journalist and Lance's word, I trust Armstrong."

L'Equipe is owned by the Amaury Group whose subsidiary, Amaury Sport Organization, organizes the Tour de France and other sporting events. The paper has often raised questions about whether Armstrong has ever used performance enhancing drugs. On Tuesday, the banner headline of its four-page report was "The Armstrong Lie."

EPO, formally known as erythropoietin, was on the list of banned substances at the time Armstrong won the first of his seven Tours, but there was no effective test then to detect it.

The allegations took six years to surface because EPO tests on the 1999 samples were carried out only last year — when scientists at the national doping test lab outside Paris opened them up again for research to perfect EPO screening, with the blessing of the World Anti-Doping Agency.

Another five-time Tour champion, Miguel Indurain, said he couldn't understand why scientists would use samples from the '99 Tour for their tests.

"I feel the news is in bad taste and out of place, given that it happened six years ago after his first Tour victory, and after he won six more," Indurain wrote in the Spanish sports daily Marca. "With the little I have to go on, it is difficult to take a position, but I think at this stage there's no sense in stirring all this up."

Jan Ullrich, the 1997 Tour champion, said he did not have all the details and did not want to be too quick to judge.

"But clearly I would be very disappointed if the story were true," he wrote on his Web site.

L'Equipe's investigation was based on the second set of two samples used in doping tests. The first set were used up in 1999 for analysis at the time. Without that first set of samples, any disciplinary action against Armstrong would be impossible, French Sports Minister Jean-Francois Lamour said.

Lamour said he had doubts about L'Equipe's report because he had not seen the originals of some of the documents that appeared in the paper.

"I do not confirm it," he told RTL radio. But he added: "If what L'Equipe says is true, I can tell you that it's a serious blow for cycling."

The International Cycling Union did not begin using a urine test for EPO until 2001. For years, it had been impossible to detect the drug, which builds endurance by boosting the production of oxygen-rich red blood cells.

Jacques de Ceaurriz, the head of France's anti-doping laboratory, which developed the EPO urine test, told Europe-1 radio that at least 15 urine samples from the 1999 Tour had tested positive for EPO. The year before, there were more than 40 positive samples, he said — reflecting how widespread the drug was when riders thought they could not be caught.

The lab said it could not confirm that the positive results cited in L'Equipe were Armstrong's. It noted that the samples were anonymous, bearing only a six-digit number to identify the rider, and could not be matched with any one cyclist.

However, L'Equipe said it was able to confirm the samples were Armstrong's by matching the cyclist's medical certificates with the results of positive doping tests bearing the same sample numbers.

Armstrong has insisted throughout his career that he has never taken drugs to enhance his performance. In his autobiography, "It's Not About the Bike," he said he was administered EPO during his chemotherapy treatment to battle cancer.

"It was the only thing that kept me alive," he wrote.

___

AP Sports Writer Chris Lehourites in London contributed to this report.



Chris

If this is turning into a pathetic political forum type thread then move it or close this thread because, personally, I am getting insulted.

Now why should it be closed? :confused:

Chris

Fucking frogs.


Sure the next time you see me say that to my face.


That's why Mr. Payroll

Sure the next time you see me say that to my face.


That's why Mr. Payroll
So why close the thread? Report the post like you are supposed to and move on to something else..

I don't think there is any doubt France in general is out to get Lance and that's worth talking about, even if others don't agree.

Call me crazy, but calling someone a Frog and using the "N" word to describe an African American are in two entirely realms of scope.


Ignorance is bliss in Arizona.

Nor are the fucking Jews, but I'm guessing that's not an OK expression.

I don't like the French much either, but the continual French bashing is making people seem pathetic. Let it go.


Yes.

Ignorance is bliss in Arizona.

And stupidity is abound from where ever the hell you are from.

And stupidity is abound from where ever the hell you are from.


You think frog and n*gga are entirely different and I'm the one who's stupid.-rolleyes-

Take a look at this link:

http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0FCM/is_3_30/ai_80678770

Towards the middle it lists some racial slurs that happened in the NHL

* In 1990, the league decided not to take any disciplinary action when New York Islanders right wing Graeme Townshend, who is black, accused Ranger left wing Kris King of making a racial slur.

* The league didn't act when Devils winger Claude Vilgrain, a native of Haiti, said the Quebec Nordiques' Mats Sundin used "a little racial slur" in a game in March 1992.

* In November 1907, the Washington Capitals' Chris Simon was suspended for three games for using a racial slur against the Edmonton Oilers' Mike Grier, who is black.

* A few weeks later, Simon's teammate, Craig Berube, was suspended for a game without pay for calling the Florida Panthers' Peter Worrell, who is black, a "monkey" during an on-ice scuffle. Brian Burke, the senior vice president and director of hockey operations for the NHL at the time, said that although Berube apologized, "the remarks cannot be ignored."

* In October 1998, the NHL interviewed 14 people before deciding it had found insufficient evident that the Tampa Bay Lightning's Sandy McCarthy and Darcy Tucker had made racial comments and gestures toward Worrell.

* A month later, the league didn't take action against the Philadelphia Flyers' Chris Gratton, whom Worrell accused of calling him an "ape."

* In April 1999, Sharks defenseman Bryan Marchment was suspended one game for using "an offensive comment" against the Canucks winger Donald Brashear, who is black.

* A few weeks later, McCarthy, then with the Flyers, said Leafs winger Tie Domi "dropped the `n-bomb' on me" during a game. The accusations could not be substantiated.

* Ottawa Senators forward Vaclav Prospal was ordered last season to attend a diversity-training session after calling Montreal Canadiens defenseman Patrice Brisebois a "frog," a slur directed toward Brisebois' French-Canadian heritage.


If frog wasn't as bad as nigga or ape (to a black guy), then why the hell it is on the same list?


Next time, know what you're talking about before calling anyone stupid, http://image.allmusic.com/00/amg/cov200/drf500/f574/f57469kaufk.jpg

I don't know what's more stupid. The fact that you looked that up or the fact that you think "frog" is even in the same league as the "N" word. rotfl

And another thing, since when do the actions of the NHL mean anything? So what if they suspended a one guy. I guess by extrapolation, because the NHL thinks it's bad, then the whole world does, no? -screwy-

I don't know what's more stupid. The fact that you looked that up or the fact that you think "frog" is even in the same league as the "N" word. rotfl


Just because you don't hear "frog" every day doesn't mean that it's not as bad as "******".

Like I said, ignorance is bliss in Arizona.

Just because you don't hear "frog" every day doesn't mean that it's not as bad as "******".

Like I said, ignorance is bliss in Arizona.

Yeah. The word "frog" as an alleged slur has nearly the same history as the "N" word. :violin:

I'm sure when the etymology of the word frog is studied, we can see the long history of it being used to bring down and slander the French. :lol:

I cant believe that the "N" word is censored on this forum, but the "Fr" word isnt. Whats up with that?

I cant believe that the "N" word is censored on this forum, but the "Fr" word isnt. Whats up with that?

Because nigga is more widely used as a derogatory term than frog or chink or jap or gook or whatever. Those words aren't censored either and that doesn't make them any less derogatory.

Why do I get the feeling that Elldubtoo never thought about this issue for two seconds before tonight? Leave the arguing up to someone who has a stake in the issue.

Frog isn't censored because it's a term for an animal other than just French people. We can't censor cracker, or we'd never hear the end of it from Thor.

Why do I get the feeling that Elldubtoo never thought about this issue for two seconds before tonight?

When is that not the case?

Why do I get the feeling that Elldubtoo never thought about this issue for two seconds before tonight? Leave the arguing up to someone who has a stake in the issue.



What stake?
I'm of French descent and while I don't care if someone calls me a frog, I do care when there are ignorant people going around using racial slurs and thinking it's ok as long as it's not as bad as nigga.

Frog isn't censored because it's a term for an animal other than just French people. We can't censor cracker, or we'd never hear the end of it from Thor.
:lol:

I'm pretty sure chrisih8u was kidding.. ;)

What stake?
I'm of French descent and while I don't care if someone calls me a frog, I do care when there are ignorant people going around using racial slurs and thinking it's ok as long as it's not as bad as nigga.

As someone so politely pointed out before, the French aren't a race, therefore it's not a racial slur. If you are going to make statements, at least let's make them factually correct.

:lol:

I'm pretty sure chrisih8u was kidding.. ;)
Yeah, and I'm pretty sure Elldubtoo wasn't, when he replied to chris :D

As someone so politely pointed out before, the French aren't a race, therefore it's not a racial slur. If you are going to make statements, at least let's make them factually correct.
I think he meant ethnic slur.

As someone so politely pointed out before, the French aren't a race, therefore it's not a racial slur. If you are going to make statements, at least let's make them factually correct.


So using faggot is ok since gays are not a race?

A derogatory term is a derogatory term, racist or not.

Yeah, and I'm pretty sure Elldubtoo wasn't, when he replied to chris :D


Nah, I just wanted to see how many racial slurs go through the censor.

Chink-check
Jap-check
Gook-check

I think he meant ethnic slur.
Let's not put words into his mouth. Just want to make sure he understands what he's arguing is factually incorrect.

Let's not put words into his mouth. Just want to make sure he understands what he's arguing is factually incorrect.


What am I arguing? I'm arguing that frog is a derogatory to french people just like nigga is a derogatory term to black people and chink to chinese, gook to vietnamese, etc.

So using faggot is ok since gays are not a race?

A derogatory term is a derogatory term, racist or not.

That's exactly what I said. Thanks for reaffirming my point.

That's exactly what I said. Thanks for reaffirming my point.


What's your point? using Frog is ok?

What am I arguing? I'm arguing that frog is a derogatory to french people just like nigga is a derogatory term to black people and chink to chinese, gook to vietnamese, etc.

That the term "frog" is not a racial slur. It may be an ethnic slur, but it's not a racial slur as you claim it to be.

What's your point? using Frog is ok?

it's called sarcasm, since I clearly did not state anything of the sort.

We were arguing on whether or not frog is ok to use and then you bring up the fact that I said that it was a racial slur while in reality it's an ethnic slur. Big deal, same thing. Main point is that it is a derogatory term and you still haven't proved it is not one.

How is a race defined anyway? It is based on someone dated logic according to dictionary.com

Usage Note: The notion of race is nearly as problematic from a scientific point of view as it is from a social one. European physical anthropologists of the 17th and 18th centuries proposed various systems of racial classifications based on such observable characteristics as skin color, hair type, body proportions, and skull measurements, essentially codifying the perceived differences among broad geographic populations of humans. The traditional terms for these populationsCaucasoid (or Caucasian), Mongoloid, Negroid, and in some systems Australoidare now controversial in both technical and nontechnical usage, and in some cases they may well be considered offensive. (Caucasian does retain a certain currency in American English, but it is used almost exclusively to mean “white” or “European” rather than “belonging to the Caucasian race,” a group that includes a variety of peoples generally categorized as nonwhite.) The biological aspect of race is described today not in observable physical features but rather in such genetic characteristics as blood groups and metabolic processes, and the groupings indicated by these factors seldom coincide very neatly with those put forward by earlier physical anthropologists. Citing this and other pointssuch as the fact that a person who is considered black in one society might be nonblack in anothermany cultural anthropologists now consider race to be more a social or mental construct than an objective biological fact.

We were arguing on whether or not frog is ok to use and then you bring up the fact that I said that it was a racial slur while in reality it's an ethnic slur. Big deal, same thing. Main point is that it is a derogatory term and you still haven't proved it is not one.

And you haven't proved it is? Just because the NHL suspended a person for saying it, doesn't make it so.

it's called sarcasm, since I clearly did not state anything of the sort.


Would you say frog is a derogatory term? And saying "fucking frogs" should be ok but saying "I don't like niggas and chinks" is not?

And you haven't proved it is? Just because the NHL suspended a person for saying it, doesn't make it so.


You said that frog and nigga are entirely different. I just showed you that they are both on the same list of offensive remarks made by hockey players.

You said that frog and nigga are entirely different. I just showed you that they are both on the same list of offensive remarks made by hockey players.

And so since hockey players deem it offensive, that's the end all for it being offensive? Here I thought it was society that deemed things offensive, and not the NHL.

And so since hockey players deem it offensive, that's the end all for it being offensive? Here I thought it was society that deemed things offensive, and not the NHL.


So you think society doesn't deem the term "frog" offensive?

So you think society doesn't deem the term "frog" offensive?

I don't know. I don't dare speak for "society". Why don't we go outside and ask it.

I don't know.


Ignorance is bliss.


I'm done with arguing with you.

Ignorance is bliss.


I'm done with arguing with you.

I love how you quote me out of context. That's the true mark of someone that's lacking in skills to argue his point intelligently. :up:

I don't know. I don't dare speak for "society". Why don't we go outside and ask it.


Ignorance is bliss.

I'm done arguing with you.

Happy now?

Ignorance is bliss.

I'm done arguing with you.

Happy now?

Yes. I'm glad we had such a one-sided debate where you so eloquently backed up your points.

Picking on the French is like making fun of poor people and fat people, perfectly acceptable.

FROG YOU!!!! Ellsissydubsuxxors1!!

LA Frogger what up!!!

\/\/

I never knew the french were enslaved for centuries. :shrug:

If I had the time to do so, I would send official warnings to a number of you in this thread. This kind of crap may be allowed in the political forum, but not when I'm around to monitor the Sports forum (which isn't often, but I'm here right now).

I'll leave this thread open for the time being, and I hope you will go back to discussing the original topic of this thread, but the ethnic slurs will stop RIGHT NOW. You've all been warned, if you continue this ridiculous fighting, the thread will be closed, and if anyone uses another slur, you WILL get an official warning.

Well. That was interesting.

Back on topic, Lance has threatened to sue whoever is responsible for this rumor. He won't, however, since it would cost him hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal fees and a whole lot of his time. He's done with this.

BTW, did you know that the word "frog" is another word for: dollar, freshman, knife and scissor's kick (in swimming)? Link (http://thesaurus.reference.com/search?q=frog)

Official Poll:

Maryland Sucks - 1
Maryland Does Not Suck - 0

On topic....

There's an interesting Q&A segment with Lance on his official site:

http://www.thepaceline.com

You have to be a member to read it (registration is free).

Lance will also be on Larry King tonight at 9 p.m. EST/8 p.m. CST

there just seems to be a small segment of the population in France that just seethes at the thought of an American dominating this race for so long. Unfortunately it seems like many of these people are involved in the organization and covering of the event. Didnt they ransack his hotel room this year (or was it last year)

remember this is the country where they were colluding with I think russia to fix the figure skating scores.

my feeling is that the test is a fake. either its a false positive, or someone just made sure they got the result they wanted.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20050825/sp_nm/cycling_armstrong_dc

Armstrong doping storm moves from science into law

By Francois Thomazeau
2 hours, 6 minutes ago


PARIS (Reuters) - As is often the case when doping allegations are made, the debate over whether seven times Tour de France champion Lance Armstrong took EPO in 1999 is rapidly moving from the scientific sphere into the legal.

Whatever the truth of the matter, and Armstrong strongly denies any wrongdoing, the report in L'Equipe that the American's urine samples contained the banned blood-boosting substance is very unlikely to lead to any retroactive sanctions.

Officials from the organizations involved - cycling's ruling body, the World Anti Doping Agency, French sports ministry officials and Tour de France organizers - agree normal anti-doping proceedings have not been followed.

Jacques De Ceaurriz, the head of the Chatenay-Malabry laboratory which conducted the tests, made it clear they were carried out for only scientific purposes and had no legal value because only one sample was tested.

According to WADA rules, no sanction can be taken against an athlete if one sample, rather than the normal two, shows traces of a banned substance.

The samples have been frozen since being taken during the 1999 tour, the first won by Armstrong. A test to detect EPO did not exist at the time.

Armstrong, who has denied ever taking performance-enhancing drugs during his career and has never failed a dope test, summed up the legal implications on Wednesday.

"Ethically, how can you put a guy's name or prosecute a guy like that when he has no defense?

"I know two pieces of the WADA code that are very important. Number one, if an athlete only has one sample left, it is strictly mandated that that sample must always remain anonymous.

"If any WADA-accredited laboratory wants to use that sample, for experimentation or scientific research, they must have the approval of the athlete.

"So right there, you have two serious violations of the new WADA code," he said.

REPEATED ALLEGATIONS

Armstrong, who has had to face repeated doping allegations by French media since his first victory in 1999, hinted he might not take legal action over the French newspaper report. He is currently suing the authors of a book alleging he took drugs.

"Who do you take action against in this case? Is it WADA? Is it the (French sports) ministry? Is it L'Equipe? Is it the laboratory? Who is it? They're all at fault there," he said.

The Texan, a cancer survivor deeply involved in working with others suffering from the disease, said he had better things to do with his money than indulge in another costly court battle.

Armstrong is currently involved in a legal case against a Texas insurance company who have refused to pay him bonuses he was entitled to after his 2002, 2003 and 2004 Tour victories after arguing the legitimacy of the wins could be questioned.

Regardless of their scientific validity, the way in which the results of the tests on Armstrong's 1999 samples have been obtained is in breach of anti-doping procedures.

WADA chief Dick Pound :lol: said Armstrong might have to "give explanations" about the tests but said the agency could not "do anything concrete" for the time being.

Pound passed the baton to the UCI, saying it was up to the world cycling body to act. UCI chief Hein Verbruggen said there was "nothing official" and it was waiting to find out whether the report was true.

As for Tour organizers, they insisted they had no power to ban or suspend an athlete on doping offences because UCI and WADA were the only institutions entitled to take action.

Tour director Jean-Marie Leblanc suggested retroactive sanctions might be the future weapon against doping.

"This case brings a new element in the fight against doping - retroactive testing, which is now possible and could, in my opinion, be used as another tool," he said.

RETROACTIVE SANCTIONS

Leblanc agreed, however, that current WADA or UCI rules made it impossible to sanction a rider retroactively.

Comparisons have been made in France with the BALCO doping case which led to American sprinters being banned for taking the THG steroid.

The athletes did not fail dope tests for the steroid at the time of racing as it was unknown. They were banned after tests were carried out in secret.

Tour de France deputy director Christian Prudhomme said the big difference was that in the BALCO case, U.S. athletes were banned after being shown undeniable evidence of testing which had been properly carried out. Some also confessed.

By comparison, confusion rather than clarity surrounds the L'Equipe accusations.

Armstrong quoted "four or five anti-doping experts around the world that have gone on the record and said this is crazy."

De Ceaurriz, the man who devised the EPO test, insists he is one hundred percent sure the tests were valid.

The problem is that the French scientists tested bottles bearing numbers on them, not names, and these names would never have been leaked if proper protocol had been followed.


Chris

remember this is the country where they were colluding with I think russia to fix the figure skating scores.

And that is relevant how? ANd I wasn't aware that the whole country colluded with Russia on the figure skating, thanks for letting me know that.

He should come out of retirement and win another Tour just to spite them.
That would really piss 'em off.

Well, I remain convinced that drugs, etc. should be allowed in sports because I want to be entertained, dammit. But I seem to be a lone voice. :(



I'm here. :wave:

As for the rest of this thread, SANTA VACA!!!!

Well. That was interesting.

Back on topic, Lance has threatened to sue whoever is responsible for this rumor. He won't, however, since it would cost him hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal fees and a whole lot of his time. He's done with this.


Technically he already tried, since one of the main behind this report at L'Equipe is a co-author of the L.A. Confidential book that had allegations based on disgruntled former employees of lance. That book is largely discredited. Sounds like more bullets from the same people that have been attacking Lance for years.

Also the "Tour Director" that is making it sound as if Lance "Owes" the tour and and everyone else anexplanation, is employed by the same company that ownes L'Equipe

These tests sound fishy to me. However the cycling cleanup hadn't started in 1999 and everybody was on something. So was Armstrong on something at some point? I definitely believe so, but I don't care because they all were. Let's face it, pro athletes will deny any doping charges until they get caught. I don't believe Armstrong anymore than I believed Palmeiro. But then again, I'm a frog so what do I know. :)

Also the "Tour Director" that is making it sound as if Lance "Owes" the tour and and everyone else anexplanation, is employed by the same company that ownes L'Equipe

I'm surprised a bigger deal isn't being made of this. Fishy.

Okay, now you guys are talking about 'fish'. Make up your minds! :lol:

Chris

The key phrases here are:

The Chatenay-Malabry lab said in a statement that the samples they tested did not have names attached and they could not confirm if any of the samples were Armstrong's.

Armstrong could never win over French fans or journalists.

"The paper even admits in its own article that the science in question here is faulty and that I have no way to defend myself.

"They state: 'There will therefore be no counter-exam nor regulatory prosecutions, in a strict sense, since (the) defendant's rights cannot be respected."'

Five-times Tour de France winner Miguel Indurain says the accusations of doping made by sports newspaper L'Equipe against Lance Armstrong are part of a campaign designed to discredit the American rider.

"They have been out to get him in France for a number of years," Indurain was quoted as saying on the website todociciclismo.com on Tuesday.

What a bunch of boobs! They don't even have a complete test, because according to reports, you have to have an A and B sample. They only have the A sample. Not only that, Armstrong has been tested numerous times in the past, and never failed a single test according to ESPN.

Armstrong has insisted throughout his career that he has never taken drugs to enhance his performance. In his autobiography, "It's Not About the Bike," he said he was administered EPO during his chemotherapy treatment to battle cancer.

"It was the only thing that kept me alive," he wrote.

Seems a valid reason for the drug to be in his system (if it is in fact a valid treatment for cancer).

This is a witch hunt by a country that is pissed at him winning "their" event 7 years in a row. F the French.

agreed

come on, it took 7 years to test this sample? BS

Well. That was interesting.

Back on topic, Lance has threatened to sue whoever is responsible for this rumor. He won't, however, since it would cost him hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal fees and a whole lot of his time. He's done with this.

I could see him finding a lawyer to do it for free, or at least for no out of pocket up front costs

He should come out of retirement and win another Tour just to spite them.
That would really piss 'em off.

I'd love to see that

I'd love to see thatI've always said he should have gone for the even ten.

Seems a valid reason for the drug to be in his system (if it is in fact a valid treatment for cancer).
it is an important drug for cancer, and for anemia. but it wouldn't be in his system any longer (~3 years after the treatment).

part of the problem with the test is that lab experts around the world have long agreed EPO wouldn't show up 3 days after the sample was taken, even if frozen.

This lab was experimenting with a new test (still not an approved testing method) to test older/stored samples. They claim that it may not be reliable if a sample had epo and it wore off (false-negative), but no chance for a false-positive (the only way it detects EPO is if the sample had some originally).

From what I hear, EPO isn't even dangerous, its just cheating, like pumping yourself with extra blood (see tyler hamilton).

The whole lab - paper -tour connections are abviously stretching great lengths to disprove armstrong (and create creditablity for their past accusations), and that would lend me to believe they are more than capable of mixing up/tainting samples, whatever.

Sure the next time you see me say that to my face.


That's why Mr. Payroll

Wow, I didn't know my comment would cause so much trouble :lol:. I honestly don't consider that term to be racist, just as I personally don't consider Jew, honky, etc to be racist or offensive. For the record I am white and have a Jewish girlfriend, so take that for what it's worth.

Anywho, sorry if I offended anyone. It certainly was not intended.

http://img396.imageshack.us/img396/7735/thatsracist2hr8fo.gif

Wow, I didn't know my comment would cause so much trouble :lol:. I honestly don't consider that term to be racist, just as I personally don't consider Jew, honky, etc to be racist or offensive. For the record I am white and have a Jewish girlfriend, so take that for what it's worth.

Anywho, sorry if I offended anyone. It certainly was not intended.
This is now the second time in the last 10 minutes I have seen someone list "jew" as a possibly offensive term. Is everyone using a different dictionary than me? When did "jew" become remotely offensive to anyone? :hscratch:

<=== a jew

Edit: if jew is used as a verb it is offensive, but that wasn't how it's been used in the post above or the other one I saw

"Is there a term besides 'Mexican' you prefer? Something less offensive?"

"Mexican isn't offensive."

"Well, it has certain connotations."

- The Office (US)

Guys, let's drop the off topic discussion. If not, the thread will be closed.

Wow, I didn't know my comment would cause so much trouble :lol:. I honestly don't consider that term to be racist, just as I personally don't consider Jew, honky, etc to be racist or offensive. For the record I am white and have a Jewish girlfriend, so take that for what it's worth.

Anywho, sorry if I offended anyone. It certainly was not intended.

No problem, and really it was just frustration with the bashing of the French in a sports forum (although Parisians are another story :) ) since part of my family is from there. It does get annoying after awhile.

I did not take it as 'racist', just as a derogatory term in the way that it was used...really after reading the posts on this thread it was just a sore spot.


<----shakes hands :)

Back on topic, Lance has threatened to sue whoever is responsible for this rumor.

So did Raffy...but I think now he might not do so.

Cycling to judge Tour dope claims

Armstrong reveals reputation fear
Cycling's governing body the UCI is investigating reports of positive drug tests during the 1999 Tour de France.
The UCI, which did not name seven-time winner Lance Armstrong as among those under investigation, said it would reveal its findings within 10 days.

French newspaper L'Equipe alleged last week that signs of blood-boosting drug EPO were detected in samples of Armstrong's urine during the 1999 race.

Armstrong has consistently denied the drugs allegations levelled at him.

The UCI said it regretted the breach of confidentiality in the disclosure of samples, but was pressing ahead with its own assessment.

EPO was on the list of banned substances in 1999, but there was no effective test to detect it.

The L'Equipe investigation was based solely on B samples - the second of two samples used in doping tests. The A samples were used up in 1999.

Tour de France director Jean-Marie Leblanc said that although the report seemed credible, Armstrong had to have a chance to deny the claims.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/other_sports/cycling/4195666.stm

Apparently, there's still enough left of the B samples to re-test for EPO (and check for DNA). And I hate to say this, but somehow I doubt all six samples will come up as negatives. I also saw a Belgian WADA official on tv (it's here (http://www.vrtnieuws.net/sport_master/wielrennen/hoofdpunten/050823_reactie_armstrong_di/index.html?video_2), but in Dutch) and he was pretty damning too, explaining that the samples were tested using three different techniques, all delivering independant positives.

According to the Belgian WADA guy, the samples show that Armstrong took 3 courses of epo, to prepare for 6 stages, including the heaviest stages in the Alps and the Pyrenees......

According to the Belgian WADA guy, the samples show that Armstrong took 3 courses of epo, to prepare for 6 stages, including the heaviest stages in the Alps and the Pyrenees......

If this information is fact, how can they even be releasing it when it is in direct violation of the WADA code?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/other_sports/cycling/4195666.stm

Apparently, there's still enough left of the B samples to re-test for EPO (and check for DNA). And I hate to say this, but somehow I doubt all six samples will come up as negatives. I also saw a Belgian WADA official on tv (it's here (http://www.vrtnieuws.net/sport_master/wielrennen/hoofdpunten/050823_reactie_armstrong_di/index.html?video_2), but in Dutch) and he was pretty damning too, explaining that the samples were tested using three different techniques, all delivering independant positives.

According to the Belgian WADA guy, the samples show that Armstrong took 3 courses of epo, to prepare for 6 stages, including the heaviest stages in the Alps and the Pyrenees......

If this is true, it's no big surprise. I'll say it again, everybody was on EPO in 1999.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20050831/sp_nm/cycling_usa_dc;_ylt=ArsvycTmscLA.z84oY1y_XxpCGYD;_ylu=X3oDMTA4aTcxZmtlBHNlYwMxNjk4

USA Cycling lashes out at Armstrong allegations
By Steve Ginsburg

Wed Aug 31, 9:29 AM ET

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - USA Cycling's chief operating officer Steve Johnson has lashed out at the recent doping allegations made against seven-times Tour de France winner Lance Armstrong.

French newspaper L'Equipe alleged last week that Armstrong's urine samples contained the banned blood-boosting substance EPO (erythropoietin) in 1999, the first year he won the world's greatest cycle race.

American Armstrong has denied ever taking performance-enhancing drugs during his career and has never failed a dope test.

"This isn't a 'doping positive'," Johnson told Reuters on Tuesday by telephone from USA Cycling's headquarters in Colorado Springs.

"This is just a publication in a French tabloid newspaper. That's our perspective.

"To me, this is an issue for the French people. They seemed very concerned about it and frankly I don't care what they think. And I don't think Lance does either."

There were no tests in 1999 to detect EPO, a drug that increases the level of red blood cells and endurance.

However, samples from the 1999 Tour were kept and have been recently retested by an anti-doping laboratory in Chatenay-Malabry outside Paris.

CERTAIN RIGHTS

"WADA (World Anti-Doping Agency) and the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency, they've all defined a process for collecting samples, managing samples, testing the samples, identifying the people who are involved," said Johnson.

"They have certain rights in the process. None of that has been followed in this case."

Officials from cycling's ruling body, WADA, the French sports ministry and the Tour de France all agree normal anti-doping proceedings had not been followed.

Chatenay-Malabry laboratory officials concede the tests were carried out for only scientific purposes and had no legal value because only one sample was tested.

"This whole thing isn't a big deal for Americans," said Johnson.

"What Lance has accomplished is so much bigger than just the Tour de France. That's only part of it."

The 33-year-old Armstrong is known throughout the world not only for his cycling accomplishments but because he has also overcome cancer.

The Texan retired in July after winning his seventh Tour.


Chris

The Texan retired in July after winning his seventh Tour.


Did he?


Armstrong is engaged and contemplating a comeback
Seven-time Tour de France champ says he might ride again.

By Suzanne Halliburton
AMERICAN-STATESMAN STAFF
Tuesday, September 06, 2005

Cycling champion Lance Armstrong is engaged to rock star Sheryl Crow and is considering coming out of retirement to try for an eighth consecutive Tour de France victory, he told the Austin American-Statesman on Monday.

Since Armstrong and Crow have been living together for 18 months, their engagement may have been expected, though the couple has been dispelling breakup rumors since May. But a spring wedding followed by a summer Tour?

"I'm thinking about it," Armstrong said. "I'm thinking it's the best way to piss (the French) off." Armstrong said he has entertained the idea for only the past two weeks. He said he began thinking about it when a French newspaper reported Aug. 23 that he had tested positive six times for a banned blood booster as he was winning his first Tour in 1999.

When asked how serious he was about another Tour, Armstrong said, "I'm exercising every day."

Armstrong has made a career of proving people wrong, winning a record seven Tours after surviving advanced testicular cancer in 1996. And he often is at his best when he's got a motivational chip on his shoulder.

Since the articles appeared in L'Equipe, an all-sports daily newspaper based in Paris, Armstrong has vehemently denied ever using erythropoietin, a blood booster that has been illegally used by cyclists for years.

A French laboratory outside Paris, trying to perfect relatively new testing procedures for EPO, used urine samples provided by Tour cyclists in 1999 in its research. All samples were anonymous and assigned a number, and all were B — or backup — specimens, the A samples having been tested and discarded in 1999.

Armstrong provided 17 urine samples in 1999, representing every day he wore the leader's yellow jersey in the three-week Tour. Researchers have concluded that EPO can stay in the body and be detected by a urine test for up to one week. According to L'Equipe, which claimed it was able to match up the numbers with the names of the cyclists, Armstrong tested positive six times. It did not mention the other 11 samples. The International Cycling Union began investigating the matter Aug. 29. The nonprofit regulatory organization, based in Switzerland, is expected to announce its results this week. USA Cycling already has issued a statement supporting Armstrong.

Last April, Armstrong announced that this year's Tour would be his final race. He stayed conservative throughout the Tour, winning only one stage, but still coasted to a 4-minute, 40-second margin of victory over Italy's Ivan Basso.

As for the engagement, Armstrong said he popped the question to Crow on Wednesday while they were vacationing in Sun Valley, Idaho. "We've told family and friends, stuff like that," he said. Armstrong added that he discussed the engagement with his three children before he asked Crow. It will be Armstrong's second marriage and Crow's first.

Although still officially retired, Armstrong hasn't been able to spend much time in Austin. He said he will maintain a busy schedule at least through mid-September. Armstrong is set to tape an interview with Oprah Winfrey on Wednesday, and he'll return to Idaho next week to meet with the Dalai Lama.


www.statesman.com

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20050906/ap_on_sp_ot/cyc_armstrong_retirement

Armstrong Thinking About Making Comeback

By JIM VERTUNO, AP Sports Writer
2 hours, 5 minutes ago

AUSTIN, Texas - After winning his seventh Tour de France title, Lance Armstrong stepped off the winner's podium in Paris and into retirement, declaring, "I'm finished." Six weeks later, he's already talking about a comeback.

Recently engaged to rocker girlfriend Sheryl Crow, Armstrong issued a statement Tuesday confirming that he's contemplating a return to competitive cycling in part because he knows how much it would rankle French media who believe his record of seven straight Tour wins is tainted by drug use.

"While I'm absolutely enjoying my time as a retired athlete with Sheryl and the kids, the recent smear campaign out of France has awoken my competitive side," Armstrong said. "I'm not willing to put a percentage on the chances, but I will no longer rule it out."

When he retired, Armstrong said he was looking forward to time away from the grueling months of training and six-hour rides around the countryside.

He planned to spend a few days "with a beer, having a blast" with time dedicated to playing with his three young children from his first marriage.

But he's been dogged in recent weeks with allegations of performance-enhancing drug use. On Aug. 23, the French newspaper L'Equipe reported it had evidence that six of Armstrong's urine samples from the '99 Tour tested positive last year for the blood booster EPO. The substance was banned in 1999, but there was no reliable test at the time.

Armstrong has angrily denied the charge, saying he was a victim of a "setup."

He first hinted of a comeback in an interview Monday with the Austin American-Statesman. An Armstrong spokesman on Tuesday said the comments were a joke, but within hours, the cyclist confirmed it was possible.

"I'm thinking it's the best way," to anger the French, he told the newspaper. "I'm exercising every day."

Dan Osipow, manager of Armstrong's Discovery Channel team, seemed to be caught off-guard by Armstrong's comments, but said the cyclist appears determined to protect his legacy.

"That to me sounds very Lance-like. It leaves things open and the motivation seems pretty clear. He is immensely proud of his reputation," Osipow said.

"Lance was pretty definitive when he announced his plans for retirement. But circumstances change. Who knows?" Osipow said. "I leave that to him. We all know he planned on staying fit."

Although Armstrong will be 34 by next year's race, Osipow said it's likely he could win again.

"People said if he'd stuck around, he'd be the favorite the next two, three, four years," Osipow said.

Armstrong had said he'd be back on the Tour next year, as adviser for the Discovery Channel team. Now it could be as the lead rider.

"He owns part of the team," Osipow said. "If there's a certain rider from Texas who wants to join the team, we'll have space."


Chris

Go Lance!!

:up:

I'd love for him to just keep on doing Tour de France's until he loses. :up:

I'd love for him to just keep on doing Tour de France's until he loses. :up:I'd love for him to just keep on doing Tour de France's until he knows he can't win another one.

Winning eight in a row and losing the ninth is still damn_impressive, but I think it lacks the luster of winning eight in a row and going out on top.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20050907/ap_on_sp_ot/cyc_armstrong_retirement

Armstrong to Train With Team This Winter

By JEROME PUGMIRE, AP Sports Writer
Wed Sep 7, 8:35 AM ET

PARIS - Lance Armstrong plans to train with his team this winter, increasing speculation he will end his retirement and attempt an eighth straight Tour de France win.

"It's definitely an open possibility, I know he is on the bike," Discovery Channel team director Johan Bruyneel told The Associated Press in a telephone interview Wednesday.

"He absolutely wants to be part of the training camp in December and wants to get fit to compete with the guys there," Bruyneel said, adding that Armstrong can decide to return as late as February.

When Armstrong retired in July after his seventh straight Tour win, Bruyneel had to decide whether to recruit a new team leader. He opted not to do so, suggesting the door may have been kept open for the Texan.

"We didn't really look for somebody to replace him," Bruyneel said. "For one there is nobody, not a strong leader like he was. Without him we have a very good team ... but not the favorites."

The Amaury Sport Organization, which organizes the Tour, would not comment on the speculation.

"We will express ourselves only if and when he decides to come out of retirement," spokesman Christophe Marchadier said. "There is nothing to stop him coming back on the Tour as a professional cyclist."

Armstrong, who turns 34 later this month, won this year's Tour by a comfortable margin — 4 minutes, 40 seconds ahead of Italian Ivan Basso and 6:21 ahead of Jan Ullrich of Germany.

"I'm sure he could win (another Tour)," Bruyneel said. "The way he won this year ... everything pretty much under control and he never showed any weakness. He has another Tour in his legs yet."

Armstrong, who announced his engagement Monday to rock singer Sheryl Crow, issued a statement Tuesday confirming that he's considering a comeback in part to rankle French media.

On Aug. 23, sports daily L'Equipe, which is owned by the Tour organizer, reported it had evidence that six of Armstrong's urine samples from the 1999 Tour tested positive last year for the blood booster EPO. The substance was banned in 1999, but there was no reliable test at the time.

"I think he's been very offended," Bruyneel said. "If you know him he doesn't need a lot to find some motivation. I think it woke up the competitive side of him."

Should Armstrong return, the media scrutiny surrounding him would be intense and he would likely receive a hostile reception from the French public.

"He proved in the past that he can deal with that. He is at his maximum under pressure," Bruyneel said. "Physically and mentally he can deal with a lot."


Chris

God, please, please don't come back. I just happened to have watched OLN's interview that they did with Lance after the Tour, and he was 100% adamant that his career on a bike was over for good.

My guess, is that he is just pissed off at the French media, and these rumors have to piss the french off more. I think thats the main reason for it. I think its just a ploy.

Speaking of piss, if he does come back, his victory speech will be to whip it out, piss on the podium, and yell, "Test this!"

God, please, please don't come back. I just happened to have watched OLN's interview that they did with Lance after the Tour, and he was 100% adamant that his career on a bike was over for good.

But that of course was before all of these new accusations came to light!

Chris

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20050906/ap_on_sp_ot/cyc_armstrong_retirement

"If there's a certain rider from Texas who wants to join the team, we'll have space."
Hey, Big Dave. I think they're talking about YOU. I mean, you beat him in a race, didn't you??? :up:

Hey, Big Dave. I think they're talking about YOU. I mean, you beat him in a race, didn't you??? :up:

:up::lol:

Get em Dave!

http://www.nbc4.tv/news/4953387/detail.html?treets=la&tml=la_natlbreak&ts=T&tmi=la_natlbreak_1_11190209092005

UCI: No Doping Evidence Against Lance Armstrong

POSTED: 8:57 am PDT September 9, 2005
UPDATED: 10:00 am PDT September 9, 2005

AIGLE, Switzerland -- The governing body of world cycling said Friday it has no evidence of doping against Lance Armstrong.

The International Cycling Union says it can't make a judgment regarding recent doping allegations against the retired seven-time Tour de France winner from Austin.

The union -- which goes by its French acronym UCI – said it hasn't received "any official information or document" from anti-doping authorities. Nor has it any data from the lab reportedly involved in the testing of frozen urine samples from the 1999 Tour de France.

The French sports daily L'Equipe reported last month that the performance-enhancing drug EPO was found in Armstrong's frozen 1999 urine samples.

Armstrong has angrily denied the charges and questioned the validity of testing samples frozen six years ago.

UCI says it's still gathering information and had asked the World Anti-Doping Agency and the French laboratory for more background. Most importantly, it wants to know who commissioned the research and who agreed to make it public.


Now, maybe Lance can move on with his life and legacy!

Chris

Jan Ullrich and Ivan Basso are breathing a bit easier now.

Interesting. Lance retires, French media rejoices. French media accuses Lance of doping, Lance rethinks retirement. Cycling Federation finds nothing on Lance. What does Lance do?

To me, it seems they just don't want him coming back, so they are dropping or covering up the doping allegations (for now). I wonder if they'll accuse him again when he's way to old to ride and come out of retirement.

Lance Armstrong Says He Will Stay Retired By JIM LITKE, AP Sports Writer
1 hour, 43 minutes ago



Lance Armstrong won't be getting back on his bike after all. After recent hints he might return to the Tour de France next summer to "yank the chains" of the French, the seven-time champion said Thursday that defending his reputation against allegations of doping during his 1999 win had soured any thoughts of returning to the event he dominated.

I'm sick of this," Armstrong said during a late-afternoon conference call.

"Sitting here today, dealing with all this stuff again, knowing if I were to go back, there's no way I could get a fair shake — on the roadside, in doping control, or the labs," he said.

A moment later, Armstrong added, "I think it's better that way. I'm happy with the way my career went and ended and I'm not coming back."

Armstrong spoke with reporters hours after a nasty tug of war broke out between the bosses of the international cycling union and the World Anti-Doping Agency over who leaked documents used by the French newspaper L'Equipe to accuse him of using performance-enhancing drugs.

During a 45-minute question-and-answer session, the cyclist and his handlers left little doubt whom they believed was responsible: WADA chief Dick Pound.

It was Pound who set off another round of charges and countercharges earlier Thursday by accusing cycling union boss Hein Verbruggen of supplying documents used by a French newspaper to charge that Armstrong used the blood-boosting drug EPO during his first tour win in 1999.

Armstrong, who has repeatedly denied ever using banned drugs, said he was the victim of a "witch hunt" after the report came out last month in L'Equipe, France's leading sports daily.

Armstrong said he was concerned Pound might be seeking revenge for an open letter he sent to newspapers and the WADA chief several years ago, defending his sport against the widely held notion that cycling was rife with performance-enhancing drugs.

"I was not trying to say that Dick was bad guy or a crook," Armstrong said of his letter, "but I might want to say that today. ... He's trying to divert attention from the serious ethical issues involving WADA and himself."

His agent and attorney went even further, accusing Pound of smearing Armstrong in public without conclusive proof or due process. They also said Pound had a hand in ensuring that an identifying code was included with the results of tests for EPO conducted by a French lab on Armstrong's urine samples six years after they were taken.

If true, that would violate WADA's own protocol requiring that any tests be done strictly for purposes of research.

Calls seeking comment from Pound at both his WADA office and home in Montreal were not immediately returned Thursday.

Earlier Thursday, Pound said he received a letter from Verbruggen acknowledging the cycling union, known as UCI, had provided L'Equipe's reporter with forms indicating Armstrong had doped during his first Tour victory.

"Mr. Verbruggen told us that he showed all the forms of Mr. Armstrong to L'Equipe and that he even gave the journalist a copy of one of the documents," Pound said during a conference call from Montreal.

"I don't understand why they're not stepping up to that and saying, `Well, I guess we do know how the name got public, we made it possible,'" he said.

But Armstrong said that he himself had authorized releasing the forms to L'Equipe. He said the request from the newspaper was to check whether the UCI had granted him any medical exemptions during competition, not to find out if the numerical code used by race official to identify Armstrong matched the one attached to the urine samples.

Last Friday, the UCI said it had not received enough information to make a judgment on the doping accusations.

It also criticized L'Equipe for targeting Armstrong and Pound for making public statements on the "likely guilt of the athlete" without knowing all the facts.

Pound countered by saying, "It's ... quite clear the only way there could have been a match between the code numbers and a particular athlete was on the basis of information supplied by the UCI."

He then questioned the UCI's willingness to fully investigate L'Equipe's accusations and wondered whether the cycling body was merely looking for a "scapegoat."

If so, Armstrong suggested Pound should look in a mirror.

"Is Dick Pound a vindictive person and somebody who holds grudges?" he said. "Perhaps."

He he... He said "Dick Pound".

Funny how the "no evidence found" story didn't make the news the way the original one did.


Hopefully he can work on coming back for his Austin parade/concert. Last year's free Steve Miller and Sheryl Crow concert was pretty awesome.

Good for Lance!

Armstrong said he was concerned Pound might be seeking revenge for an open letter he sent to newspapers and the WADA chief several years ago, defending his sport against the widely held notion that cycling was rife with performance-enhancing drugs.


Except that that widely held notion was true. Hence the huge cleanup attempts that occured a few years ago.

If you ignore all the crap that gets thrown right and left and concentrate on what riders have to say about this issue, the overwhelming response isn't one of surprise or denial. It's a matter of fact "EPO? Everyone was on EPO in 1999".

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051028/ap_on_sp_ot/cyc_tour_de_france

Tour de France Predicts Exciting Race

By JEROME PUGMIRE, AP Sports Writer
2 hours, 47 minutes ago



PARIS - Tour de France director Jean-Marie Leblanc has predicted an exciting 2006 race in the absence of Lance Armstrong and taken another shot at the seven-time champion.

Leblanc announced the next Tour setup, with the notable points being the absence of a team time trial, the return of L'Alpe d'Huez, and the matter of which rider takes the start line in the No. 1 jersey now that Armstrong has retired.

"It is a classical, well-balanced course. There are five wonderful mountain stages," Leblanc said Thursday. "It is a change of era. A period of long domination is over. The path is open. It is an exciting time."

Leblanc said Armstrong was discredited by allegations printed in the L'Equipe sports newspaper on Aug. 23, which claimed that he used the banned performance enhancer EPO during his first Tour win in 1999. Leblanc said there was relief in the sport that Armstrong will not be returning.

"Without doubt ... what we have learned has increased the lassitude toward him," Leblanc said. "He was not irreproachable in '99. EPO is a doping product. So this tempers and dilutes his performances and his credibility as a champion."

Johan Bruyneel, Armstrong's team director on each of his seven wins, said the Tour presentation seemed to take a cheap shot at Armstrong.

"I felt targeted during the presentation," Bruyneel said. "They talk for 12 minutes about ethics rather than presenting the race itself. I would have taken a different direction.

"I'm conscious Lance won seven Tour de France titles and owes a lot to the race. But at the same time, the Tour de France became more important with an American who won seven Tours."

Armstrong vehemently denies any wrongdoing. Leblanc made similar comments in August, and Armstrong has said he is considering whether to sue L'Equipe, France's national anti-doping laboratory and the Tour director.

The 2006 Tour starts on July 1 in Strasbourg, in the Alsace region of eastern France, then passes through Luxembourg, Germany and the Netherlands, before winding counterclockwise through the Pyrenees and then the Alps and ending on Paris' famed Champs-Elysees on July 23 — a total distance of 2,256 miles.

With five major mountain ascents — including the Col du Tourmalet, Col d'Izoard, and Col du Galibier — and three uphill finishes, the route is likely to favor the climbers.

In Armstrong's absence, 1997 Tour winner Jan Ullrich of Germany, Ivan Basso of Italy, Alejandro Valverde of Spain and Floyd Landis of the United States will try to dominate.


Chris