Lance Armstrong stripped of Tour de France titles and banned.

[Tiberius]

So why the hell doesn't he fight it then Tibs?

Him saying he's 'tired of it' is pretty fucking lame let's be honest. I'd fight in every court in the land to prove my innocence if my whole career, character and reputation were on the line. Hell this will ruin his reputation for all of time, I wouldn't stop fighting, just because it's getting tiresome.

Smacks of him being guilty in all fairness.

The reasons for not fighting it are in his statement. Bear in mind that this is just the USADA that has stripped him of his titles. The other official organisations (such as those that organise the Tour de France) have not done so yet, and they have sided with Armstrong in the past.

Not contesting charges does not make one guilty, and if one is not yet found guilty, they should be presumed innocent under the law. Whether Armstrong wants to contest the charges or not is irrelevant; a court proceeding can go ahead regardless.

[Jackalope]

So why the hell doesn't he fight it then Tibs?

Him saying he's 'tired of it' is pretty fucking lame let's be honest. I'd fight in every court in the land to prove my innocence if my whole career, character and reputation were on the line. Hell this will ruin his reputation for all of time, I wouldn't stop fighting, just because it's getting tiresome.

Smacks of him being guilty in all fairness.

I see where you're coming from. However, he's retired, so his career is not at risk. People are motivated by different factors, and based on his personal statement, perhaps he feels that making a principled stand against the USADA and not participating in what he feels is a witch hunt is his way of keeping his character intact in his own eyes.

I will admit that I'm not intimately familiar with his history. However, after reviewing some information found online, I find the lack of physical evidence and the behavior of the USADA to be suspect.

[Napoléon]

The reasons for not fighting it are in his statement.

Yeah, and as I've said, they seem weak as fuck.

Bear in mind that this is just the USADA that has stripped him of his titles. The other official organisations (such as those that organise the Tour de France) have not done so yet, and they have sided with Armstrong in the past.

Fair point, we'll see what happens.

Not contesting charges does not make one guilty, and if one is not yet found guilty, they should be presumed innocent under the law. Whether Armstrong wants to contest the charges or not is irrelevant; a court proceeding can go ahead regardless.

But the point I've made is that by not contesting them you are basically showing yourself to be guilty, at least in my view. When someone says you're a murderer, and you choose not to participate in the case because it's too tiresome, I'm inclined to think you're bullshitting. Yeah, before you go there, it's not a murder case, but I think his whole career at stake would be of reasonable importance that you would fight such charges all the way, not just dismiss them. He might not be guilty for all anyone knows, that much is true. But if that were the case, I think the reason's he's given for not fighting the case are, as I've said, very, very weak.

This is all how it just seems to me though, I hadn't even heard he'd been battling these charges for so long until today, so I may be completely wrong.

I see where you're coming from. However, he's retired, so his career is not at risk.

For real? He's being stripped of everything he's achieved throughout his career, how can you say it's not at risk? Crazy.

People are motivated by different factors, and based on his personal statement, perhaps he feels that making a principled stand against the USADA and not participating in what he feels is a witch hunt is his way of keeping his character intact in his own eyes.

That very well may be true, but like I said, from an outsider looking in, it makes him look very suspicious that he's not fighting these charges.

I will admit that I'm not intimately familiar with his history. However, after reviewing some information found online, I find the lack of physical evidence and the behavior of the USADA to be suspect.

I actually find the number of people willing to testify against him quite overwhelming. But I guess you're going into conspiracy territory as to whether they are reliable witnesses etc.

[Ryantology]

I wonder how many people know about professional cycling because of doping scandals as opposed to how many know about it because of a genuine interest in the sport.

Because, this is a great way to kill any popular interest in the States, except among those who love showing up for a public execution.

[Minimalist]

Physical evidence > witness testimony

Oh, divi Tiberio, the jesus freaks will be up your ass for that one. They've invented all sorts of "witnesses" to make up for their lack of physical evidence.

[Gambit]

It just doesn't ring true for your typical athlete, and especially not for one who is so decorated, to stand by while their legacy is stripped from them. I don't know if he is guilty or not, but if he is not going to fight the charges then there was only ever one way this was going to turn out.

As far as conspiracy theories go; the sporting world is the one arena where they are almost inevitably true. Match fixing in boxing, football, cricket; poisoning in horse/dog racing, and my kids cheating in snap, all immediately spring to mind.

[Jackalope]

I see where you're coming from. However, he's retired, so his career is not at risk.

For real? He's being stripped of everything he's achieved throughout his career, how can you say it's not at risk? Crazy.

1) He's retired already. 2) Whatever the USADA's position, if he is clean, he still knows he accomplished all of those things, regardless of what anyone might think. If he's dirty, well, then he didn't accomplish them in the first place. If he's motivated by something other than public recognition, would it matter to him?

People are motivated by different factors, and based on his personal statement, perhaps he feels that making a principled stand against the USADA and not participating in what he feels is a witch hunt is his way of keeping his character intact in his own eyes.

That very well may be true, but like I said, from an outsider looking in, it makes him look very suspicious that he's not fighting these charges.

No doubt, it does cast some suspicion.

I will admit that I'm not intimately familiar with his history. However, after reviewing some information found online, I find the lack of physical evidence and the behavior of the USADA to be suspect.

I actually find the number of people willing to testify against him quite overwhelming. But I guess you're going into conspiracy territory as to whether they are reliable witnesses etc.

Conspiracy theory? LOL. No, I'm just unwilling to convict someone in the court of public opinion based on testimony that hasn't been heard.

Whether he's guilty or not, I'm not going to lose much sleep over it. However, based on the evidence that we have seen, the USADA's case looks prima facie pretty weak.

[Napoléon]

1) He's retired already.

Missing the point.

2) Whatever the USADA's position, if he is clean, he still knows he accomplished all of those things, regardless of what anyone might think. If he's dirty, well, then he didn't accomplish them in the first place. If he's motivated by something other than public recognition, would it matter to him?

It should do, considering it will destroy not only his reputation, but the reputation of the organisations he's founded. Like it or not, if he's considered a cheat at what he's recognised and revered for, it's certainly going to impact his life dramatically, and all he hopes to achieve, or has achieved. You're living in a fantasy world if you think this whole situation does not risk his career.

Conspiracy theory? LOL. No, I'm just unwilling to convict someone in the court of public opinion based on testimony that hasn't been heard.

Not what I was talking about, but whatever.

Whether he's guilty or not, I'm not going to lose much sleep over it. However, based on the evidence that we have seen, the USADA's case looks prima facie pretty weak.

True, I wont lose sleep either.

But if the evidence is so weak as you suggest, what sense does it make to not contest it.

Again, smacks of guilt to me.

Certainly something doesn't add up.

[Tiberius]

But the point I've made is that by not contesting them you are basically showing yourself to be guilty, at least in my view.

Your view is wrong. "No contest" =/= "Guilty". No contest means you don't want to fight the charges anymore; you'll let the court (or overviewing body) decide.

I think his whole career at stake would be of reasonable importance that you would fight such charges all the way, not just dismiss them.

His career is already over. I suspect he doesn't want to be dragged through a judicial system which he already suspects to be corrupt (now confirmed by the fact they assumed him guilty without a trial), and sit in front of people he used to call his friends as one by one they accuse him of doping. If he doesn't care what will be a small minority of people think about him, why bother? He already knows he's won fairly; he already knows the titles are his. If he wants to just slip into the background and live the rest of his life quietly without all this drama, the more power to him.

Also note that the USADA have no right to take anything away from him in the first place. They are just making noise for the media. The USADA can only make recommendations, and it is up to the actual sporting bodies to act on them or not.

This is all how it just seems to me though, I hadn't even heard he'd been battling these charges for so long until today, so I may be completely wrong.

He's been battling accusations all his cycling career, and every single time he has shown up to a drug test and been presented with a negative result. This has been going on for over a decade now; he even came out of his first retirement because of the allegations. If I were him, I'd feel like there was no way I could prove my innocence; some people clearly just won't accept the truth.

I actually find the number of people willing to testify against him quite overwhelming. But I guess you're going into conspiracy territory as to whether they are reliable witnesses etc.

Not necessarily a conspiracy, but some of the witnesses seem to be suggesting that the entire Armstrong team was doping. It wouldn't surprise me if all those team members are testifying against Armstrong in return for immunity against doping charges against them.

[Napoléon]

Your view is wrong. "No contest" =/= "Guilty". No contest means you don't want to fight the charges anymore; you'll let the court (or overviewing body) decide.

I didn't say it meant he was guilty. I'm saying it makes him look guilty (hence why I said "show").

His career is already over. I suspect he doesn't want to be dragged through a judicial system which he already suspects to be corrupt (now confirmed by the fact they assumed him guilty without a trial), and sit in front of people he used to call his friends as one by one they accuse him of doping. If he doesn't care what will be a small minority of people think about him, why bother? He already knows he's won fairly; he already knows the titles are his. If he wants to just slip into the background and live the rest of his life quietly without all this drama, the more power to him.

Also note that the USADA have no right to take anything away from him in the first place. They are just making noise for the media. The USADA can only make recommendations, and it is up to the actual sporting bodies to act on them or not.

Fair point and I've said it's a fair point before now.

But I still remain flabbergasted that he's using the excuses he has to not contend them.

He's been battling accusations all his cycling career, and every single time he has shown up to a drug test and been presented with a negative result. This has been going on for over a decade now; he even came out of his first retirement because of the allegations. If I were him, I'd feel like there was no way I could prove my innocence; some people clearly just won't accept the truth.

If that's the case then yeah, I can understand why he's getting tired of it. I'd never give in though, if fighting on is what I'd have to do to keep my reputation in tact, then I'd probably do that. But hey, I'm not in his situation, so I can't say really.

Not necessarily a conspiracy, but some of the witnesses seem to be suggesting that the entire Armstrong team was doping. It wouldn't surprise me if all those team members are testifying against Armstrong in return for immunity against doping charges against them.

Yeah this was what I was referring to, not what Cthulu seemed to be laughing at. Even just the fact that the people testifying are his old competitors seems fishy.

Anyways, getting tired of labouring my point. It's only my take on the situation, I don't know the facts fully to be honest. If I'm wrong I'm wrong, just voicing my opinion.