Take the 2-minute tour ×
Bicycles Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people who build and repair bicycles, people who train cycling, or commute on bicycles. It's 100% free, no registration required.

I know that Lance Armstrong has decided not to fight the allegations of his doping; while technically not an admission of guilt - he is being sanctioned/punished for doping. I've also read that several of his team-mates and team doctors have also been sanctioned/punished/banned for life for their involvement in doping.

Is there a single, comprehensive list of everyone from the team (for the various) years that either has been busted or hasn't been? Is it pretty much accepted that everyone cheated, or were there people involved who were actually clean and unaware of the cheating?

share|improve this question
add comment

1 Answer

up vote 7 down vote accepted

While there are a lot of riders that have admitted doping, and/or been sanctioned for it (As well as others involved in the teams), I don't think anyone has compiled a single "Lance list". If you want to know, you are pretty much going to have to look through the team members and then check each of them individually.

In addition to US Postal, Trek/Discovery and other Lance variations, many riders of the same era from other teams have also been sanctioned, among them Ulrich, Vinokourov (sp), Pantani, Basso, and the list goes on.

Now that the USADA information has been released, the number of people named/sanctioned that testified include 11 former teammates in the USPS/Discovery days, among then Hincapie, Christian Vandevelde, Levi Leipheimer, Frankie Andreu. There are also quite a few redacted (Blacked out) names that are either not riders or are foreign riders. There have been quite a few resignations and firings among team staff related to this. There is an excellent interview with Levi here: http://www.pressdemocrat.com/article/20121016/ARTICLES/121019643

Note: Some of the following is hearsay type material: There is also speculation that the UCI itself was complicit in Lance's case, letting the team know when testing would occur, etc. (End vague, hearsay type evidence).

One of the running jokes I've heard is that if they do actually take the titles away from Lance (Which is still up in the air, that's a UCI decision and will probably eventually end up in CAS [Court of Arbitration for Sport]), they will have to find some club riders to give it to because nobody else would be left.

In short, it's a big mess, and it's probably safe to say that doping was (and still is) rife in elite cycling, and the ones that get caught are the ones that simply aren't paying attention.

Oh, and for the record, Lance has tested positive twice, once for corticosteroids (1999), which was not outside the legal limits and attributed to a saddle cream, and another test in the 2000's was tossed out because the sample wasn't handled properly.

I think it's a bit of a misnomer to label it all as the "Lance doping scandal", however. Lance is just the most visible part of a very large iceberg.

And to add, now that the iceberg is starting to break up, many sponsors are leaving Lance (As of 10.18.2012) These include Nike, Giro, Trek, Anheuser Busch. Honey Stinger (Of which he is an investor) is removing his likeness from packaging, and he has stepped down as chairman of Livestrong. There is speculation that SRAM is attempting to buy back his shares as he is an investor there as well.

share|improve this answer
5  
+1 for "I think it's a bit of a misnomer to label it all as the "Lance doping scandal", however. Lance is just the most visible part of a very large iceberg." –  Olly Hodgson Sep 12 '12 at 15:40
    
I think it's a bit glib to throw away '(and still is)' about current pros' doping. While it would be naive to think it has been eradicated, with blood passports and genuine out of competition random testing, it is becoming much harder to get away with it. Also, analyses of the major races have proven that recent Grand Tours really are slower than previous - the power outputs of the top riders really are lower than they were, haemocrit levels aren't all sat at 49.9. Armstrong is the prime example of "only the stupid get caught" and there will be more to come out, but the good guys are winning. –  Unsliced Sep 12 '12 at 16:56
1  
Yes, they are slowly winning. But I do think that elite cycling (cat 1/2 and up) is still doping, and that the tests are always a reactive measure trying to keep up with new techniques. –  JohnP Sep 12 '12 at 17:03
3  
cyclinginvestigation.usada.org - this might is a good primary source for things which had been "rumors" the above answer had to quote back when it was written –  johannes Oct 18 '12 at 8:48
add comment

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.