Support road.cc

Like this site? Help us to make it better.

news

Less a smoking gun, more a nuclear bomb: USADA publishes Lance Armstrong evidence in full

Mass of damning detail reveals years of organised cheating by Armstrong and his teammates

Less the smoking gun that many expected and more a nuclear explosion, the fallout from which will continue for months, years, to come. That’s the initial impression given by USADA’s publication this evening of its full reasoned decision plus supporting documents in the Lance Armstrong case on its website.

It also shatters the myth that many Armstrong supporters continued to cling to, that the agency's evidence was based on "hearsay," backed by statements from a handful of self-confessed dopers.

The material USADA has made public damns not only Armstrong, but many others active in the sport during what is now termed the "dark years," and who continue to be involved in it. It's not an exaggeration to say that after today, none of us will view the sport in the same way ever again.

The sheer volume of evidence, and the minute detail it goes into, is astonishing and there is little chance of making sense of the whole so soon after its publication on USADA’s website, apparently brought forward due to the main document being leaked on the internet while still under embargo.

We’ll be analysing the contents and their implications more fully in the days ahead, but for now, here are some key points that emerge:

Armstrong was invited to meet with USADA prior to his being charged. He declined that offer, “setting in motion the sequence of event that led to USADA’s charges and ultimately [his] sanction.”

USADA says “the achievements of USPS/Discovery Channel… including those of Lance Armstrong as its leader, were accomplished through a massive doping conspiracy… Armstrong’s career on USPS/Discovery Channel… was fuelled from start to finish by doping.”

For reasons of transparency, USADA has discussed its evidence “in significant detail, just as an arbitration panel would have done had Mr Amstrong been willing to allow the evidence in his case to be heard by independent arbitrators.”

It’s worth pointing out that had Armstrong elected to go to arbitration, he would have had to allow the retesting of suspect samples or accept USADA’s findings on those issues; as it is, he can continue to protest that incorrect testing protocols were used, or that the samples were just suspect, and not hard evidence of doping. Such protestations now have an increasingly hollow ring.

Witness testimony from a number of former USPS riders including George Hincapie and Jonathan Vaughters asserts that Armstrong was openly using EPO and cortisone from the time he joined the team following his return to the sport in 1998 after beating cancer.

Following the arrival of Johan Bruyneel and Dr Luis Garcia Del Moral from ONCE in 1999, doping is alleged to have been systemic at USPS in pursuit of the sole ambition of winning the Tour de France. Dr Michele Ferrari, who had been working with Armstrong for several years, was closely involved in team training camps. By now, it is said that a system was in place to ensure distribution of EPO to riders.

USADA has witness statements asserting that Armstrong was able to escape sanction in repect of a positive test for cortisone on the 1999 Tour de France only because of a backdated prescription from Del Moral for a saddle sore cream containing the substance. Witnesses state that the saddle sore cream story was a fabrication and that the presence of cortisone was due to an injection.

The agency say that by the 2000 season, doping at USPS had gone beyond the use of EPO and testosterone and now also encompassed blood doping at Bruyneel’s instigation.

During the same season, Armstrong allegedly abandoned a race in Spain after Hincapie, who says in his affidavit that he knew that his team leader had just taken testosterone, texted him to warn him that drug testing personnel had arrived at the team hotel. By the year end, Hincapie, like other team mates, would have been invited to work with Ferrari in exchange for a substantial slice of his annual income.

By now, Armstrong had become the biggest story in sport; the man who had beaten seemingly terminal cancer and come back to win possibly the toughest event in any sport. True, uncomfortable questions were already being asked, but at that point, the doubters were a tiny minority.

However, USADA’s documentation reveals how year after depressing year, as the myth of Armstrong was being carefully nurtured, the doping programme at USPS was being carefully nurtured.

Its evidence for that isn’t from a handful of jealous rivals or former team mates who had lied under oath about their own drug use – yes, Tyler Hamilton and Floyd Landis are among the witnesses, but they are heavily outnumbered by riders who, before opening up to USADA, had unblemished reputations.

In painstaking detail, USADA catalogues the allegations made against Armstrong by a succession of those who provided it with detailed affidavits; the training with Ferrari, the team’s systematic approach to doping, the clandestine transfusions in hotel rooms, the evasion of drugs testers. The attention to detail is immaculate, each assertion carefully footnoted with a direction to the affidavit where it is made.

Revelations in the reasoned decision and its supporting documentation range from the truly mundane to the absolutely shocking.

An example of the former lies in a trip by Armstrong to Italy to meet with Dr Michele Ferrari being identified because his then wife Kristin, who accompanied him, asked Betsy Andreu, wife of US Postal rider Frankie Andreu, if she “would make some risotto if the Armstrongs brought the ingredients from Italy.”

An illustration of the latter is the allegation by former US Postal rider Jonathan Vaughters that Armstrong had told him that he blamed the UCI for the extent of the cancer that nearly killed him, because its doping controls had not picked up high levels of HCG in his system when the disease was at its early stage.

Vaughters claims that Armstrong told him: “If I ever have a doping problem, I have this card to play.”

As it turned out, Armstrong folded his cards the moment a US district court judge ruled that USADA did have jurisdiction in the case.

Whatever his protestations that he was the victim of a witch hunt, and that USADA lacked powers to sanction him, the body of evidence made public by the agency today leaves one with the overriding impression that Armstrong knew his opponent had been dealt an unbeatable hand.
 

Simon joined road.cc as news editor in 2009 and is now the site’s community editor, acting as a link between the team producing the content and our readers. A law and languages graduate, published translator and former retail analyst, he has reported on issues as diverse as cycling-related court cases, anti-doping investigations, the latest developments in the bike industry and the sport’s biggest races. Now back in London full-time after 15 years living in Oxford and Cambridge, he loves cycling along the Thames but misses having his former riding buddy, Elodie the miniature schnauzer, in the basket in front of him.

Add new comment

66 comments

Avatar
Lacticlegs replied to michophull | 11 years ago
0 likes
michophull wrote:

Erm...I didn't say I'm doubting the evidence and no I haven't read all of those USADA online reports. Frankly I've got better things to worry about. So, can someone tell me in plain English how he got round all of the doping controls when so many didn't ?

Sorry michophull - that was perhaps a little harsh, I just couldn't believe I was still hearing that jaded old line about being continually tested etc.

It looks like this has already been answered but in short, he beat the testers through:

a) there not being a test for EPO in the early years (which is why they found EPO in Lance's stored samples from 99 when they retested them years later.)

b) micro-dosing EPO directly into the vein rather than subcutaneously (under the skin) - it clears through the body faster and is detectable for a shorter period (a period they apparently described as their 'glow time')

c) Use of actual blood transfusions - usually on a rest day of the tour apparently - and there is no ratified test for this. (Although WADA are trying to gain acceptance for a test that detects the plasticizers of the blood bags that are used for this - it was this they apparently detected in Contador's samples during the whole 'contaminated steak' farce, and another reason they were reluctant to buy his excuses (though for now the test remains unratified)).

d) foreknowledge of when they would be tested - allowing them a window of time to infuse a saline drip (and thus lower hematocrit to allowed levels) Or just evading the testers - through avoidance (changing their whereabouts at short notice, and in one case apparently quitting a race to avoid testers at the finish) or delaying tactics to allow other measures to be taken before the test.

e) paying lots of money to the world's top doping doctor (Michele Ferrari) to receive a training plan with performance enhancing drugs integrated in the most effective way along with the dosages and timescales and masking systems necessary to evade detection.

The other key thing to bear in mind is that whilst many people were caught, there are a great many names (including several who have testified against LA now) who have never failed a dope test - just as Lance (untruthfully) asserts - and yet have now admitted to doping during this period - and they have also outlined the methods they used to achieve this.

Avatar
Lacticlegs replied to hairyairey | 11 years ago
0 likes
hairyairey wrote:

wilsonhenry - I agree with you it sounds very odd that a moped could follow the tour without being noticed, leaving aside the fact that a moped would struggle to keep up if it's carrying mini fridges. The picture I've seen online is a motorbike and would be very noticeable. I would expect Tyler Hamilton to know the difference between a motorbike and a moped by now.

I also see online that an individual has rung up the gardener and challenged him about the evidence in Tyler Hamilton's book, so he could have ruined a police investigation. Ironically he claims that the French Authorities should take the gardener in for questioning but if I'm right he'll be the one taken in for questioning.

(I've put this on the guy's blog I doubt he'll publish it).

From what I've read USADA claim that they have evidence beyond reasonable doubt (a far higher test than in a civil case which is on the balance of probabilities). Given that the witness evidence is coming from admitted dopers they must have something more impressive than that, eg video and independent witness evidence.

Anyway, I'm posting nothing more online until I've read the entire report. I'm going to have a busy time working through it. I'll be looking for extremes with the witness statements, either they are too similar (indicating collusion) or that they don't support each other (indicating that they are probably made up).

Guys...you're killing me! What lengths are you gonna go to to hang on to the fairy tale?

You think it would be unlikely for a moped/motorbike or whatever to follow the tour without being noticed? Wow...where to start? This is a road racing bike forum, so I'm guessing at least some people here will have visited the tour - or at least watched it on TV? I've been four times - it's a circus, absolute bloody chaos! The idea that a moped or scooter or, frankly, a vehicle of ANY description would be noticed is laughable.

And how would it keep up? You're joking right? He doesn't have to 'keep up' - it's not like Lance is bombing down the Col du Peyresourde with 'motoman' and his ice box of EPO glued to his back wheel! He just has to get to the hotel or other designated meeting spot, and he doesn't have to follow the tour route (and for what it's worth, apparently the strain of doing this for three weeks did kinda wipe him out!)

Most important - the evidence is NOT just coming from convicted dopers. That excuse is no longer valid. To be honest - it never was. As far as I'm concerned the people who were doing the doping are the best positioned to tell us about it - I notice no one assumes that a career criminal cannot possibly be telling the truth when they turn supergrass; that is probably the most effective weapon the courts have ever had against organised crime...yet when it happens in the (admittedly less serious) scenario of professional cycling, then the inside story cannot be believed? Whatever. Game's up - plenty of non-convicted dopers have spilled the beans too.

Avatar
Lacticlegs replied to OldnSlo | 11 years ago
0 likes
OldnSlo wrote:

Well I'm still gonna ride me bike - whether there's doping or not. Armstrong was a talented rider but fatally flawed - he cheated others but mainly himself and now he looks like a 'true fool' as the true scale of his treachery unravels. Forget him and talk about Greg Lemond, Brad and other who are clean - or those do the utmost to make it so that others can be.
So, forget Lance, seriously - please do. He'd hate that the most.

Arguably the best advice I've seen throughout the whole sordid business...

Avatar
The Rumpo Kid | 11 years ago
0 likes

Forget Lance by all means but don't forget that the UCI, his main ally in his struggle with USADA, is still running cycling. What was their role in the whole sorry business? At best useless incompetents, at worst... either way unfit for purpose.

Avatar
stupomft | 11 years ago
0 likes

I`m begining to doubt he walked on the moon as well.

Avatar
Daclu Trelub | 11 years ago
0 likes

I've been saying for years there should be two levels of competition.
1. Anything goes - riders/athletes can take or do anything to win.
2. Totally clean - utterly undoped, unenhanced in any way.

The medals, kudos, public approbation goes to the clean winners and the doped winners get ignored.
Any clean athlete found to be cheating is stripped of his/her titles and all prize monies are forfeit - this will include all properties and assets bought with such monies and his/her name will be struck from the record books and all sponsorship or advertising deals will be immediately terminated and all rewards for such will be forfeit.

Pages

Latest Comments