On Sep 13, 12:15*am, Ryan Cousineau wrote:
In article
,





wrote:
On Sep 12, 3:52*pm, "Tom Kunich" cyclintom@yahoo. com wrote:
"mtb Dad" wrote in message

....
On Sep 12, 12:08 am, Ryan Cousineau wrote:

Lance was never particularly enthusiastic about doping from a
philosophical point of view. He saw it as a necessary part of racing,
and feared getting popped only slightly less than he feared losing.

I think that he probably was using all sorts of drugs before his cancer as
was noted by Andreu's wife and then used as proof that because he used drugs
before he got so near death it proved that he used drugs after.

you wouldn't consider andreu's wife might have been bought for false
testimony by the insurance company that owed lance ? who were the
doctors in the room at the time ? men in black perhaps ?

Well, I'd consider that, but it requires a pretty big conspiracy, for a
pretty small payoff.

What would it cost to buy off Betsy? "A lot" is my guess; by any
calculus such a lie was going to seriously screw up her husband's life
and career (and I'd argue that's what happened).

Then you have to look at the real return to the insurers, who would
specifically reap that yield, and the monstrously large penalties if any
one of the conspirators were caught.

--
Ryan Cousineau /
"In other newsgroups, they killfile trolls."
"In rec.bicycles.racing, we coach them."- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

It sounds like the possibility never occured to you before; consider
frankie- yes it cost him his job, but it could've cost him his wife if
he didn't side with her, some people take their marriage vows very
seriously, and according to walshs book frankie stated he didn't
actually hear what his wife said she heard. insurance companies
especially in the states, or off shore, have not been known as icons
of honesty, fairness and integrity. no one says " he's as honest or
fair as an insurance company" unless they say it in a sarcastic
manner. insurers think in terms of mathematical possibilities and win/
loss gaming theory- everything has some risk, but for say perhaps $500
000, they thought they could save $5 million. getting caught ? nah, it
was just an overly zealous now ex-employee. guess they didn't expect
to lose double in the settlement, otherwise they would've paid him the
5 straight out as it still would've been cheaper than the $10 million
they were ordered.

I reciently read that lance allowed the retesting of the 1999 samples
that they state showed some blood doping... now, if he had cheated he
had gotten away with it till then, so why would he then allow
retesting ? if you pass an academic exam, or say some job performance
evaluation, would you really want to risk those results by agreeing
to doing it again ? that just goes against human nature to me. I don't
think lance knew at the time he was asked that the retesting would
destroy those last samples, that's like agreeing to go to court a 2nd
time on serious charges because your lawyer tells you that even if the
verict is guilty, he can say double-jepoardy, anull the verdict and
you're clear for life of those charges- that just doesn't happen.