Basic points of case vs. Armstrong

WHO: Usada used testimony from 26 witnesses, including 11 former teammates as the cornerstone for a roughly 200page report detailing systematic drug use. One of them, George Hincapie, was with Armstrong through all seven of his Tour de France titles and his willingness to speak candidly was thought to pave the way for many others to follow suit. “I would have been much more comfortable talking only about myself, but understood that I was obligated to tell the truth about everything I knew. So that is what I did,” Hincapie said.

WHY: Usada had already sanctioned Armstrong, banning him from cycling for life and taking away all his competitive results dating to 1998, which includes his seven Tour de France titles. But when Armstrong chose not to fight the case in arbitration, it left a large void. Usada never had the venue to show all its evidence. Meanwhile, the International Cycling Union wanted to see what Usada had before it went along with the group’s findings.

WHEN: Presented with Usada’s evidence, UCI now has 21 days to review it and decide whether it wants to appeal the case to the Court of Arbitration for Sport. Usada says Armstrong’s sanctions stand but many in the cycling world are waiting for UCI to sign off on them, as well.

WHAT: The evidence includes testimony claiming numerous examples of Armstrong using multiple drugs, distributing the drugs to teammates and pressuring teammates to go along with the program. Usada also cites tests consistent with drug use. The validity and accuracy of those tests have been disputed but Usada says they only serve as corroborating evidence and aren’t needed to make the case against Armstrong. Usada also details payments made from Armstrong to physician and training guru Michele Ferrari, who has also received a lifetime ban from Usada. Armstrong claimed he had cut ties with the doctor in 2004, but Usada cited financial records showing payments of more than $200,000 in the two years after that.

Armstrong attorney Tim Herman called the Usada report “a one-sided hatchet job — a taxpayer funded tabloid piece rehashing old, disproved, unreliable allegations based largely on axegrinders, serial perjurers, coerced testimony, sweetheart deals and threat-induced stories.”