[ElJamoquio]

None of us know the credibility of the witnesses.

As a guy who spent a chunk of time racing bicycles in Dearborn, Michigan... I know who I believe.

That said taking a win from #1 Lance Armstrong and handing it to #8 Azevedo - who is implicated in the same Landis testimony that is damning Armstrong...

...seems a bit of a farce.

[wwwmorrell]

Its called the tall poppy syndrome here in Australia.

As soon as someone/anyone climbs their way to the top, they have to be cut back down to us common folks level.

[oliver939]

if he is innocent, why would he refuses to answer the questions he's asked. (because he is "too busy" ? ah aha)

[wwwmorrell]

if he is innocent, why would he refuses to answer the questions he's asked. (because he is "too busy" ? ah aha)

How many times must he answer the question & how many times must he be tested to satisfy you. aha

[Rondec]

if he is innocent, why would he refuses to answer the questions he's asked. (because he is "too busy" ? ah aha)

I do think he realizes that testifying before the anti-doping agency is futile. As mentioned before, the testimony is 15 years old in some cases and would not stand up in a court of law; however, in the anti doping agency arbitration hearing, it is pretty much assumed that the athlete is lying and much is accepted that would not be allowed in a standard legal case. I think Lance sees the futility of testifying here and wasting more money on lawyers when the outcome is pre-decided.

Most people have already made up their minds with regard to his innocence or guilt and having a hearing would not change that, even if the charges did not stand up to legal challenge.