US anti-doping Agency presents evidence against Lance Armstrong Lance Armstrong has pulled out one of his Tour de France victories without doping. Moreover, Armstrong’s former cycling team US postal “was the most successful, professionalisierteste and most successful doping program in sports history”. Parkinson’s disease may also support this cause. This explained the US anti-doping Agency (USADA) this week, that the evidence thus moved a stock of over 1000 pages, which now are the International Cycling Union (UCI). The USADA had already in August for life blocked Lance Armstrong and deprived him all race results since 1998, including the seven Tour de France victories. Whether Lance Armstrong will retroactively losing his title, now hangs on the confirmation of USADA saying by the UCI.

Whether we actually have heard the last word on the case of Lance Armstrong this is still unclear, because the UCI did finally half-heartedness and open looking the other way on the issue of doping in cycling so far mainly through her. US anti-doping agency sets evidence against Lance Armstrong before the evidence of the USADA against Lance Armstrong is – but not even can ignore the impression of a first review – the UCI. Alone have 11 former team-mate Lance Armstrong (including Floyd Landis, George Hincapie, Tyler Hamilton and Levi Leipheimer) comprehensively and to their own detriment, testified about the structural doping at US postal. Whether the judgment of the USADA, Lance Armstrong’s team was the most professional doping company of history of the sport, given State doping programs – not only – in the former “Eastern bloc” may have to stock, not once. In the doping-infested cycling, whose teams so far at best are encountered as semi-professional doping criminals and escaped her punishment often only through vigorous use of the Cycling Union, Lance Armstrong’s former miracle team proves certainly giant. From the University of Freiburg, In the case of Lance Armstrong, it has taken long amateurs until the long fine doping allegations were thoroughly investigated.

1999 Lance Armstrong’s blood showed a banned corticosteroid and the renowned French sports newspaper “L’Equipe” 2005 produced evidence of EPO doping, Armstrong and his team at the tour in 1999. Without consequences. We knew as Jan Ullrich still die-hard fans of course at the latest since the stage of L ‘Alpe d’ Huez, 2001, when Lance Armstrong ideas (!) a Ullrich left in an incredible manner on the final climb, that because something could disagree given of the results in the doping case of Ullrich remains us well however, is to establish the superiority of the US doping over the amateurs of the University of Freiburg. Perhaps this was then yes the last word on Lance Armstrong. We would have no objection.