ANTIQUES SHOPS

Although Armstrong has not been charged with any offences and has repeatedly denied ever cheating, USADA told the American they had forwarded their allegations to the Anti-Doping Review Board, which would decide whether to proceed with the case.

"This formal notice letter is the first step in the multi-step legal process for alleged sport anti-doping rule violations," USADA said in a statement released on Tuesday.

"As in every USADA case, all named individuals are presumed innocent of the allegations unless and until proven otherwise through the established legal process.

"If a hearing is ultimately held then it is an independent panel of arbitrators, not USADA that determines whether or not these individuals have committed anti-doping rule violations as alleged."

Five of Armstrong's associates, three doctors and two team officials, were also told that procedures had begun against them in what could be one of the biggest doping cases in sports.

Armstrong, who has never failed a doping test, denied the charges.

"I have never doped, and, unlike many of my accusers, I have competed as an endurance athlete for 25 years with no spike in performance, passed more than 500 drug tests and never failed one," he said in a statement.

USADA sent Armstrong and his associates a 15-page letter outlining the accusations against them between 1998 and 2011 that was later circulated among media organizations.

The allegations included prolonged use of a range of performance-enhancing drugs including erythropoietin (EPO), blood transfusions, testosterone, corticosteroids, human growth hormone and masking agents.

The Texan was also accused of trafficking and administering drugs to other cyclists as well as conspiring with team manager Johan Bruyneel, doctor Pedro Celaya, doctor Luis del Moral, doctor Michele Ferrari and trainer Jose Pepe Marti.

CONTROVERSIAL CAREER

Armstrong is one of the most successful and controversial cyclists of all time. A cancer survivor, he returned to the sport after beating the illness and won the Tour de France an unprecedented seven times in succession from 1999 to 2005.

Although he never failed a doping test, he was dogged by accusations of cheating and foul play.

The U.S. Justice Department spent two years investigating the claims against him but closed their case in February without laying any charges against him.

Armstrong said USADA's accusations were the same as the Justice Department's.

"These charges are baseless, motivated by spite and advanced through testimony bought and paid for by promises of anonymity and immunity," he said.

"Although USADA alleges a wide-ranging conspiracy extended over more than 16 years, I am the only athlete it has chosen to charge.

"USADA's malice, its methods, its star-chamber practices, and its decision to punish first and adjudicate later all are at odds with our ideals of fairness and fair play."

USADA said they "numerous riders, team personnel and others" had provided statements that Armstrong used drugs and would be prepared to testify against him. They did not identify any other witnesses.

USADA also said they had evidence that Armstrong tested positive for EPO during the 2001 tour of Switzerland but the results were covered up.

Cycling's world governing body, the UCI, had previously denied any knowledge of a cover up when those same allegations were first made.

USADA also said blood samples taken from Armstrong in 2009 and 2010 indicated the use of EPO and/or blood transfusions.

If found guilty, Armstrong could face a life ban from competing, USADA said, although Armstrong himself said he could also be stripped of his seven Tour de France titles.

The 40-year-old Texan retired from cycling earlier this year but has taken up triathlon and had planned to compete in a race in France in two weeks.

The UCI said it had been informed of USADA's decision to commence proceedings but was not involved in the case.

"This is the first time USADA has communicated to UCI on this subject," cycling's governing body said a statement.

"The UCI is not aware of the information that is available to USADA on the persons concerned and has not been involved in the proceedings opened by USADA."

(Reporting by Julian Linden; Editing by Greg Stutchbury)

Just two days ago, the 14-year-old Zhang was told he had gained a spot in the 156-player field for the year's second major, making him the youngest player to compete in the event since World War Two.

He is possibly the youngest U.S. Open competitor ever, but the tournament's records are not fully comprehensive before 1945.

Whichever way you look at it, Zhang's achievement is remarkable and he has earned the respect of golfing heavyweights such as 14-times major winner Woods and defending U.S. Open champion Rory McIlroy.

Woods made a point of walking up to Zhang on the practice range at the Olympic Club and shaking his hand, leaving the young Chinese spell-bound.

"I was on the range, hitting balls," Zhang told reporters on Wednesday about his surprise encounter with the former world number one. "My buddy, Chris, he was like, 'Hey, Andy look behind you, it's Tiger'.

"I looked back, it was Tiger walking up. I got really excited, and he actually came up to me and shook my hand. And I was like, 'Wow, I just shook Tiger's hand'. Obviously I'm really excited."

Zhang, who is based in Florida and does his school work on-line, earned his place in the U.S. Open on Monday when Britain's Paul Casey withdrew from the event because of a shoulder injury.

"I don't have that high (level) of expectation for this time," Zhang said of his goals for this week. "I just want to come out here, enjoy myself and learn as much as possible, just have fun, I guess."

Northern Irishman McIlroy, himself aged just 23, believes that is the best strategy for Zhang as he competes this week on golf's biggest stage.

WORDS OF WISDOM

"When I was 14 I was getting prepared to play in my club championship, not the U.S. Open," world number two McIlroy grinned, "so I'm not sure I could give him any words of wisdom.

"I think he should just enjoy it, take it all in and just realise that he's got so much more time to develop and mature. By the time he's 18 he'll feel like a veteran."

For the moment, Zhang is simply trying to calm his nerves and handle the bright glare of the media spotlight as best he can.

"I am really excited to be the first person that's a 14-year-old to play in this event and I'm trying to get used to all these media and fans coming up to me and sign autographs," he said.

"I am shaking a little right now sitting here," Zhang added while facing a packed interview room. "I heard Jack Nicklaus was sitting in this chair this morning. Was he?"

Golfing great Nicklaus certainly was, being honoured by the United States Golf Association in the same room earlier in the day on the 50th anniversary of his first U.S. Open victory.

"So I'm trying to get used to all this," Zhang said. "I'm not doing quite well right now."

Zhang has already done well enough this week, and benefited from having a practice round on Tuesday with Masters champion Bubba Watson and Australian Aaron Baddeley.

"And Bubba, I thought I was going to be looking up to him but actually he's just a normal person," Zhang said. "He was really nice to me and he gave me a lot of good tips."

Zhang will make his U.S. Open debut when he tees off in Thursday's opening round with Japan's Hiroyuki Fujita and American Mark Wilson. (Reporting by Mark Lamport-Stokes in San Francisco; Editing by Frank Pingue)

It is now up to a Manhattan federal jury to decide if this evidence against Gupta, a former board member at Goldman Sachs Group Inc and Procter & Gamble Co, is persuasive enough to convict him.

Historically, insider trading cases have been difficult for prosecutors to win because of their circumstantial nature. The investigation of Rajaratnam -- built on eight months of court-approved wiretaps and culminating in his conviction at trial last year -- was a major exception because the government had dozens of secretly recorded telephone calls of him discussing stock tips with friends and associates.

In the Gupta case, prosecutors only had a few wiretaps they could use to bolster their charges that Gupta supplied Rajaratnam with some of his juiciest tips. They had no telephone recording between the two men to back one of their most dramatic contentions: that Gupta, a minute after disconnecting from a Goldman board conference call on September 23, 2008, told Rajaratnam about plans by Warren Buffett's Berkshire Hathaway to inject $5 billion in the investment bank.

The jury heard evidence that Rajaratnam hurriedly ordered his traders at hedge fund Galleon Group to try to buy $40 million worth of Goldman stock in the few minutes that remained in the trading day after he received that 35-second call from Gupta.

"There was only one call to Rajaratnam's direct line in the last 10 minutes of the trading day, only one call in the last hour," Assistant U.S. Attorney Richard Tarlowe said in his closing argument Wednesday. "And it was from Rajat Gupta."

Gupta's defense lawyer, Gary Naftalis, responded: "If he was truly rushing, he wouldn't have waited a minute, he would have called in two or three seconds."

Lawyers following the trial have different opinions about how the jury might view the circumstantial evidence.

JaneAnne Murray, a white-collar defense attorney and professor at the University of Minnesota Law School, said even circumstantial government evidence in the trial could overwhelm the defense's case.

"The 'wrong place in the wrong time' defense works once, maybe twice," said Murray, who is not involved in the case. "The problem is when one is trying to defuse too many suspicious instances."

But Chicago securities lawyer Andrew Stoltmann, who is also not involved in the case, said the lack of direct evidence could lead the jury to acquit Gupta. An acquittal would halt the office of Manhattan U.S. Attorney Preet Bharara's run of victories in a series of insider trading trials over the past 15 months.

Gupta has said all along that he would put up a vigorous defense, describing the prosecutors evidence as purely speculative and circumstantial.

Defense lawyers wanted to play the jury wiretaps of a Goldman Sachs employee tipping off Rajaratnam about other companies to demonstrate that the money manger had other potential sources of information on the firm. The judge ruled that evidence was inadmissible because it was separate from anything in the indictment of Gupta and was likely to confuse the jury.

Gupta is charged with securities fraud and conspiracy, which carry a maximum prison term of 25 years.

BUSINESS AND FRIENDSHIP

Throughout the four-week trial, prosecutors also emphasized the years of friendship and business dealings between Rajaratnam and Gupta as evidence of how the defendant would benefit from conspiring with the hedge fund manager.

They also pulled out some star witnesses, including Goldman Chief Executive Officer Lloyd Blankfein, who testified that board conversations were always confidential and that he never authorized Gupta to share material corporate information with an outsider.

Defense lawyers sowed a few seeds of reasonable doubt, arguing that their client had no motive to leak inside information. They presented evidence that Rajaratnam had cheated Gupta out of $10 million in a joint investment called Voyager Capital Partners. The defense said the two had had a falling out in 2008.

Gupta's lawyers suggested that their client's calls to Rajaratnam could have been about the Voyager investment. "He was trying to get information on Voyager, and it had nothing to do in the world with Berkshire Hathaway," Naftalis said.

Geetanjali Gupta, the eldest of the defendant's four daughters, testified to her father's distress over Rajaratnam's handling of the investment at the time.

The jury also heard from associates and old friends that Gupta was respected for his integrity and had nothing to gain financially from helping Rajaratnam.

"There will be a lot discussion in the jury room about motive and lack of motive," said Tom Dewey, a partner at law firm Dewey Pegno & Kramarsky in New York, who is not involved in the trial.

The jurors paid very close attention throughout the trial to both sides of the case, with about half of them taking notes on yellow legal notepads.

Gupta at one point appeared likely to testify, but in the end did not.

He may have missed a chance to tell the jury his version of events, create more reasonable doubt and bring out more about his work in efforts to fight AIDS, malaria and tuberculosis in developing countries.

"Better than his lawyer, nobody could have sold the explanation better than Gupta as to why he did what he did," said securities lawyer Stoltmann.

The most important wiretaps in the case were conversations between Rajaratnam and two of his senior employees.

In one call, the day after the Buffett investment announcement, Rajaratnam told trader Ian Horowitz: "I got a call at 3:58, right? ... Saying something good might happen to Goldman."

On October 24, 2008 Rajaratnam is caught on the wiretap telling portfolio manager David Lau: "Um, now I, I heard yesterday from somebody who's on the board of Goldman Sachs, that they are gonna lose $2 per share. The Street has them making $2.50."

Prosecutors said Gupta had called Rajaratnam on October 23, 2008, only 23 seconds after a Goldman board meeting heard the firm was headed toward its first quarterly loss ever as a public company.

The case is USA v Gupta, U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, No. 11-907.

(Additional reporting by Basil Katz; Editing by Martha Graybow and Lisa Von Ahn)