Lance’s Strategy???

This entry was posted in Racing on by .

I’ve been thinking some on Lance’s situation with USADA, after yesterday, when he had his attorneys file a 80 page document to request an injunction against USADA and the hearing by the arbitration panel. A Texas judge, threw out the lawsuit and told them to refile it again, sans PR BS, if they are seriously going this route.

I honestly don’t think that Lance is going to fight this thing if he has to go in front of a USADA arbitration board to plead his case and defend himself. I have to believe that USADA has the testimony of the, supposedly, 10 riders that are going to say that they witnessed Lance using PED’s, etc. I have to believe that his attorneys would not allow Lance to testify personally, so I can’t really see an up side for his participation in the whole process. I think he is planning on just going on a public relations blitz, claiming persecution, and rehashing his 500 “clean” drug tests.

But, I have to admit, I don’t really understand the whole process. I don’t know if each person that USADA has charged in this case, Lance, Johan, etc. can have their own arbitration hearings or if it is going to be lumped into one. You’d have to assume that most of these European guys aren’t going to show. (Breaking news- USADA just announced this afternoon that 3 of the Euro guys, including Dr. Michele Ferrari, have just received lifetime bans for their involvement.)

I didn’t come up with the whole non-defense thing out of thin air. I think Lance has known this thing was coming for a long time. Lance did an interview with Men’s Journal, in May, where he was quoted as saying – “In my mind, I’m truly done. You can interpret that however you want, but no matter what happens, I’m finished. I’m done fighting. I’ve moved on. If there are other things that arise, I’m not contesting anything. Case closed.”

The article goes on to address his reaction if they took a Tour victory away from him and he said he wouldn’t be “unhappy”. That just goes to show you he doesn’t mind lying to the press. I guess that by having his attorneys file an 80 page injunction shows that he must of changed his mind after he did that Men’s Journal article in May.

Another quote is – “I’d never waste another minute trying to convince somebody I’m innocent,” said the Texan. “I think everybody’s made up their minds. Nobody’s on the fence about me anymore. It’s kind of refreshing. If someone says, ‘I think you F*** cheated, I go, ‘ok, great. Can we talk about something else? Because I really don’t give a shit what you think. I’m not going to waste any more time having that argument.”

Anyway, I wonder what happens to George, Christian, Levi, Dave and Jonathan if Lance just decides not to contest the facts? I wonder if USADA will still impose a 6 month, off-season, wrist slapping, suspension? Maybe that is why none of them are talking, that none of it will become public? I don’t know. I guess we’ll all know soon enough. Probably during the Olympics when there is other stuff going on.

Here are a few of Lance’s tweets from last week after the USADA thing was filed.

It seems Lance is implying that the guys testifying are being treated favorable by USADA by giving their statements.

Here he seems to be saying that they are all on the same side and USADA is the bad guy?

The judge obviously didn’t like his attorney’s strategy.

What USADA said Dr. Ferrari’s involvement was –


Dr. Ferrari, of Ferrara, Italy was a consulting doctor to numerous USPS and Discovery Channel Cycling Team riders during the period from at least 1999 through 2006. Since the 1990s to the present, Dr. Ferrari has been a consultant to numerous cyclists and several cycling teams. Dr. Ferrari was brought to several USPS training camps, including in the United States, where USPS team riders worked with him. Dr. Ferrari developed a distinctive mixture of testosterone and olive oil to be administered under the tongue to assist in recovery during races and training. This mixture was known among team members as the “oil.” Dr. Ferrari also advised riders on the use of the banned oxygen enhancer erythropoietin (“EPO”) with detailed instructions regarding clearance times, how the EPO drug test worked and how to avoid detection of the drug. Dr. Ferrari specifically advised riders to inject EPO intravenously in order to avoid the drug showing up in a urine drug test. Dr. Ferrari was present and assisted during instances of prohibited blood doping and EPO use by USPS team members. Dr. Ferrari developed detailed training schedules for riders which included coded symbols designating when EPO should be used and the amount of the drug to inject.” 

25 thoughts on “Lance’s Strategy???

  1. David

    Tilford… your like one of those old women who sits watching soup operas all day because you have nothing better to do. You are so ate up with this Lance thing… dude… get over it! Better yet, go get a job with the USADA!

    so sick of hearing and reading about it.

  2. Doug P

    Steve, be prepared to be flamed by what’s his name’s fans. Their psychological template is a copy of his; aggression, intimidation, bluff and bluster, designed to wear down the opposition. His is a life spent in a constant state of ‘roid rage. Not surprising from someone marinated in steroids all his youth, resulting in cancer, which characteristically he turned to his advantage. The real shame is that high school locker rooms all over America are swimming in that crap. We need to “Lance the boil”, reset the template, and make pro cycling a sport admired, not reviled. Keep up the good work, and don’t let them wear you down. We owe it to all the young athletes just starting. Their health and the good name of the sport we love is at stake.

  3. VCScribe

    David’s computer default’s to your blog. It turns itself on whenever you post something negative — or even just questionable — about the Great Champion of Universal Cancer Awareness, leaving him no choice but to be unwillingly exposed to lies, hearsay, and unfounded innuendo. Would you please just leave the poor guy (Dave) and his hero alone? Move on!

  4. Jim B

    Steve, i think you are right.

    LA will not actually contest and put up a defense. Bully and intimidate, yes, but an actual defense, no. Misuse the American court system, yes; defense in front of arbitration panel, no.

  5. tilford97 Post author

    David – I’m not ate up with this Lance thing. It is very pertinent to our sport, which I am mildly “ate up” about. This isn’t a soap opera. This is very important.

    Do you not think that this personally affected my life and livelihood? Were you racing in West Virgina, Pittsburg, and Philadelphia when Lance smeared us all and took home $1,000,000? I was. And dozens of other races.

    You have no idea how the sport has changed because of long term pollution in it. Not the riders, but the team directors and support.

    Do I think this will stop it, hell no. But you can’t turn the other cheek and say, “I’m so sick and hearing and reading about it.”

    You’re going to hear and read a lot more about it, so get used to it.

  6. Jeff M

    Well put Steve. I’m not sick and tired of reading about it, I’m sick and tired of the cheaters. Keep writing and I will keep reading.

  7. H Luce

    David – there are two groups of riders in cycling – those who dope and cheat, and those who ride clean. Riders in the second group get told that if they want to be competitive, they have to dope. Some of them eventually cave, because the lure of the big money and fame is too much, and to have a realistic chance, you have to cheat, and cheat better and more effectively than your competition. Cycling thus becomes a sport which is about cheating, finding ways to out-cheat the rest of the field. Non-cheaters are off the radar and off the team, no one wants someone like hat around, someone who could go public and rat everyone else out.

    The idea behind cheating is that it makes you a more competitive rider than your non-cheating competition. The cohort of cheaters grabs all of the money and fame and the clean riders are left with the crumbs. Over Steve’s racing career, that’s what’s happened. If the sport had been clean, there’s a good chance he’d be the one with the fame and fortune that Lance has or that any of the great and famous cheats has, but they got it instead and they did so by fraud and deception.

    It’s the same sort of thing that’s behind the LIBOR scandal, the revelation that an inside group of cheats conspired to fix interest rates to give themselves tens if not hundreds of millions of dollars of honest peoples’ money. It’s not a question of “moving forward” and letting the crooks get away with their crimes – and letting them keep the money, too, it’s taking their ill-gotten gains away from them and making an example of them to deter others from similar acts.

  8. Andrew

    Hi Steve. Just wondering if you’ve received a “friendly” note from Trek to leave Lance alone, or else.

  9. H Luce

    Case in point – about the bit with LA reflects trends in general society:

    “In a survey of 500 senior executives in the United States and the UK, 26 percent of respondents said they had observed or had firsthand knowledge of wrongdoing in the workplace, while 24 percent said they believed financial services professionals may need to engage in unethical or illegal conduct to be successful.

    Sixteen percent of respondents said they would commit insider trading if they could get away with it, according to Labaton Sucharow. And 30 percent said their compensation plans created pressure to compromise ethical standards or violate the law.”

  10. Roberto

    The thing that chaps my ass, is this arbitration panel, should not be judging this case. Everyone who has ever come before this panel, has either failed, missed or refused to take a doping control. Lance has done none of those things. People that come before this panel, are guilty first, and have to prove their innocence. Lance should not have to meet that standard. He’s only guilty by public opinion, because no proof exists. The reason the DOJ dropped the case, was because it wouldn’t stand up in court. This panel should not be able to render a verdict, that will take away someones constitutional rights, based on hearsay and opinion. This could set a dangerous precedent. On another note. Steve, I have no doubt that the doping that went on in Europe, and that migrated to the U.S., had an adverse effect on your pro career. But Lance would have smoked you and everybody else, if he had been clean too. (and i’m assuming he wasn’t, because I have no facts.) The right guy won all those Tours. If everyone in the race had been clean, Lance would still have come out on top. He had the type of talent, that comes along once in a generation.

  11. CM

    LOL Roberto.

    1. The panel is constitutional and Lance signed up for it by getting a racing license.

    2. You can’t tell where Lance would have been without drugs. Everyone responds differently to drugs, just like everyone responds differently to training. My natural ‘crit is at 46-48 so it wouldn’t do me much good to take EPO because I’d be straight over the limit of 50 in a couple of days. That probably isn’t true of Lance. The counterfactual where Lance rides clean and beats everyone up didn’t happen because he chose not to let it happen. It’s probably not true and it definitely isn’t a valid argument. He chose to cheat. He is a cheat.

  12. MM1


    So criminals can’t give evidence against other criminals? There would have been no mafia trials if that were true. Yes, should question the credibility of witnesses and the evidence that they give, but even cheats and liars can tell the truth

  13. Roberto

    The panel may or may not be constitutional, but they have never had to judge if someone was innocent or guilty before. Only guilty people have come before them, who had to prove themselves innocent. Since Lance hasn’t been found guilty, this panel should have no jurisdiction. Our legal system is allowing them to use a loophole, to act like a criminal court. And the reason they’re doing that…….because they know, in this country, where you’re innocent until proven guilty, Lance would be found innocent in a court of law, for lack of evidence. CM, you obviously don’t know shit about cycling, or the law. And you keep calling Lance a cheat, but you didn’t ever see him cheat, and there are no pictures of him cheating. So what that really is, is called an opinion. And I hope you never get to sit on a jury. I would feel very sorry for the person you convicted, because you THOUGHT they did it.

  14. Michael

    I think we’re all learning that the only way three people can keep a secret is if two are dead. All will come leaking out sooner or later. Hope Lance and others get some relief when they can finally stop lying.

  15. Bryan

    Roberto: ”The reason the DOJ dropped the case, was because it wouldn’t stand up in court.”

    Incorrect. The investigator claimed to have plenty of evidence to file charges and was about to do so but politics shut it down. No official reason was ever given and not even the official who killed the case ever claimed that it wouldn’t stand up in court.

  16. Paul

    The reason to DOJ dropped the case is because it’s an election year and cycling is pretty trivial in lots of the swing states.

  17. Roberto

    Bryan, the investigator claimed to have plenty of evidence. Hell I could claim to be Elvis, show me the evidence, then i’ll believe you. He couldn’t come out and say he had no evidence, it would look like a waste of government money. And CM, as far as Lance not being able to beat all those guys, if everybody was clean. I rode with Lance, in Dallas Texas, when he was just 14 years old, and certainly not on PED’s. He stayed with me and 2 of my Carrera teamates, for 30 miles around White Rock Lake. And we were going fast. He had more talent than you know. I’m not sure he was on PED’s when he won Worlds either. He was just that good. I’m not naive enough, to claim he was clean, while winning all those tours. I’m also not so self righteous, that I take my beliefs, and call them facts. Since i’m the only one here that lived the European scene, for 12 years, I do know what went on over there. But conjecture, tainted testimony and public opinion, shouldn’t make Lance guilty. Lance is an asshole, and his own teammates didn’t like him. Not too much of a stretch, to get those guys to say anything Tygart wants them too. Especially with the sweetheart deal they’re rumored to be getting. It doesn’t mean he didn’t do it. But it doesn’t stand up to the burden of proof, that we are supposed to require in this country.

  18. Bryan

    Roberto, I just reported the facts. You claimed that the evidence would not stand up in court. That’s total conjecture or fabrication since no official has stated anything to that effect and you have no idea what evidence they hold. Completely taking your beliefs and stating them as facts.

    Regarding ”the burden of proof, that we are supposed to require in this country”, this is not a proceeding in the U.S. court system. Here’s a good analogy copied from a recent inring blog comment regarding the guys who just received lifetime bans…

    ”…they’re not going to be arrested or put in jail. They’re kicked out of the club. It’s about the internal rules of the sports federations. I could start a club of INRNG comment writers, you could join, and then I could ban you for life because when I started the club I made a rule that I can kick out anyone I want. That’s totally fair. Of course this club is a bit bigger than that, so they actually have a reasonable legal-like process, which includes a big rulebook and possibilities for appeal. People who don’t like it can start their own international cycling federation. They did that in boxing and chess, for example.”

    Of course you already knew all this since you’re the only one who has spent 12 years racing in Europe (allegedly).

  19. H Luce

    The “burden of proof” in a civil case is “preponderance of the evidence”, i.e. “more likely than not”, not “beyond a reasonable doubt.” And even in a criminal case, many cases are won on the basis of circumstantial, not direct, evidence. If Mr. Tilford raced against Mr. Armstrong on many occasions and beat him every time, and then Mr. Armstrong suddenly gets a lot better and rides like a bat out of hell for no discernable reason, and the increase in speed coincides with the possibility that Mr Armstrong is alleged by teammates to have begun taking performance enhancing drugs or some other artificial means for increasing performance, then that suggests that something is seriously amiss.

  20. Philip

    Just out of curiosity, earlier today I spent about fifteen minutes looking up connections between Lance and the Bush administration. I’m kind of amazed at what I found. Here are some cut and paste indications with source links:

    Katherine McLane came to the foundation in 2007 from the Bush Department of Education. “My job was to defend the No Child Left Behind law,” she says. “Every teacher in America hated it, including my parents.” 

    “I think the product is hope,” says Mark McKinnon, the renowned GOP political consultant and a Livestrong board member. Armstrong’s team approached McKinnon in 2001, seeking advice on positioning Lance for a postcycling career. McKinnon, a media strategist for President George W. Bush, introduced Armstrong to another client, Bono.

    A few years ago, Robert Luskin got a phone call from Karl Rove.
    “Guess who this is?” Luskin recalled Rove saying. “It’s your old client and your new client.”

    Rove — a client of Luskin’s since he represented the former aide to President George W. Bush during the Valerie Plame investigation — happened to be sitting next to Lance Armstrong, who Luskin had just signed on to represent in a criminal investigation by the U.S. Attorney’s office in Los Angeles into whether the seven-time Tour de France winner had used performance-enhancing drugs. Luskin, a partner at Washington law firm Patton Boggs, was one of several attorneys Armstrong hired to represent him in the two-year probe that ended in February with no charges being brought.
    In June, when the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency filed its own doping charges against Armstrong, the same group of attorneys — which also includes sports lawyer Mark Levinstein of Williams & Connolly in D.C. and San Francisco trial attorney John Keker of Keker & Van Nest — reconvened, and Luskin took the lead. Luskin fired off a letter to the agency, attacking what he called the agency’s lack of transparency and due process in charging Armstrong, which he said included the agency coercing other athletes to testify against Armstrong, and refusing to have their conduct reviewed by an independent auditing committee.
    Luskin, a veteran white collar defense lawyer, has been a partner at Patton Boggs since 2000 and splits his time between Washington, Martha’s Vineyard and Atlanta. He doesn’t bike, but owns two motorcycles, a 1972 Chevy pickup and a 1971 Blazer. He is a cancer survivor — an experience he said he and Armstrong bonded over — and is the first male attorney on record to wear an earring while arguing a case before the Supreme Court, a distinction he finds amusing to this day. Below is an edited transcript of Luskin’s conversation with Capital Business.
    How did you come to represent Armstrong?
    We came to each other through a number of different tangent points. His lawyer [Austin trial attorney] Tim Herman knows all the folks [in Austin]. He knows Karl Rove, as does Lance. There was a connection there. Other folks already on the [legal] team, we had worked together closely. They were looking for a range of skills … it’s like a draft phase, they needed a second-line center and were looking at [other attorneys]. My name had come up to them in a number of different contexts. I talked to Tim Herman for awhile, and spent a bit of time talking to Lance … I was retained to help Lance in the criminal case. We started our relationship in that context. When the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency came up , the same team came together again.
    “Armstrong’s complaint is far from short, spanning eighty pages and containing 261 numbered paragraphs, many of which have multiple subparts,” Sparks wrote. “Worse, the bulk of the paragraphs contain ‘allegations’ that are wholly irrelevant to Armstrong’s claims — and which, the Court must presume, were included solely to increase media coverage of the case, and to incite public opinion against the Defendants.”
    Sparks is a 1991 appointee of President George H. W. Bush.
    Tim Herman is a partner with Howry, Breen & Herman LLP, and has practiced more than 40 years as a commercial trial attorney, representing both individuals and companies.

    Board Member
George W. Bush Presidential Campaign

    Board of Advisors 
Texas War on Drugs

    ◦ Recommend

    ◦ 0


    ◦ Share on emailShare on printShare on redditMore Sharing Services




    Bush Turned Litigious Targeted Rental Car Firm Over Fender Bender
    POLITICS 2000
    Saturday, August 26, 2000
    AUSTIN, Tex. – After years of campaigning against unnecessary litigation, George W. Bush sued Enterprise Rent-A-Car here over a fender bender involving his daughter, according to legal filings obtained by the Daily News.
    Lawyers familiar with Texas insurance law said such a suit would normally be unnecessary because Bush’s coverage would have handled his costs, minus the deductible.
    “It’s more typical to just slip it to your insurance company,” said Dallas lawyer Thomas Woodman.
    Bush’s Austin lawyer, Timothy Herman, confirmed to The News that Bush sued, although no one was hurt and the police were not called to the scene of the Sept. 8, 1998, accident.

    Bush’s 1995 Jeep Cherokee was hit while his daughter Jenna was driving “in a careful and prudent manner,” the suit says.
    Herman said Bush was insured.
    Bush also tried to sue the woman who was driving the rental car but was unable to serve her with papers, court filings indicated.
    Bush campaign spokeswoman Mindy Tucker refused to explain the case yesterday, saying only: “The governor and Mrs. Bush have a longstanding policy that they do not comment on matters involving their daughters.”
    In the April 1999 lawsuit, the governor charged that Enterprise shared blame for damage to his sport-utility vehicle because it had rented a car to Patricia Emerson while her license was suspended.
    Supreme Court of Texas.
    Esperanza Andrade, in her official capacity as Secretary of State for the State
    of Texas
    NAACP of Austin, Nelson Linder, Sonia Santana and David Van Os.
    No. 09-0420.

    October 12, 2010.
    Kristofer S. Monson from the Office of the Solicitor General, for petitioner.
    Tim Herman from Howry Breen & Herman, LLP, Austin, TX, for respondent.
    Chief Justice Wallace B. Jefferson; Nathan L. Hecht, Dale Wainwright, David M. Medina, Paul W. Green, Phil
    Johnson, Don R. Willett, Eva M. Guzman, and Debra H. Lehrmann, Justices.





    Herman volunteered to work for Bush in Florida during the 2000 debacle:

  21. Roberto

    Bryan, I know exactly what evidence they hold. It’s the same evidence they’ve always had, plus a bunch of guys saying what Tygart wanted them too. But you’re wrong about Lance just being kicked out of the club. If that was all it was, then you would be correct. But this has far more consequences, that do infringe on his constitutional rights. For that reason, this arbitration panel should have no jurisdiction. This should proceed in a court of law. Lance Armstrong is not just an athlete, he is far more than that. If they can’t proceed in a court of law, the whole matter should be dropped. But that’s my educated opinion. (ALLEGEDLY)


Comments are closed.