What's More Plausible...?

I bet those sneaky europeans even let Landis win just so he'd have to get tested.

They're all in on it.

Well, I hardly think that asking the question, "Who is guarding the guards?" smacks of conspiracy theory, but hey, that's the internet for you.

Since I've been "taken to school" about the absolute and utter improbability that the slightest whiff of corruption just MIGHT be present within a professional sports organization, we are left with two possible conclusions:

1) His first test was a false positive, for some reason.

2) Landis IS, in fact, the dumbest sonofabitch on planet Earth.

My_Aching_Fiets said:

Well, I hardly think that asking the question, "Who is guarding the guards?" smacks of conspiracy theory, but hey, that's the internet for you.

Since I've been "taken to school" about the absolute and utter improbability that the slightest whiff of corruption just MIGHT be present within a professional sports organization, we are left with two possible conclusions:

1) His first test was a false positive, for some reason.

2) Landis IS, in fact, the dumbest sonofabitch on planet Earth.

There is no viable reason, as far as I can see, as to WHY they would do it.

Having their champion accused of cheating can be nothing but bad. The headlines out there are not condemning all American cyclists as cheats, they're condemning all cyclists as cheats.

If it was Armstrong I could at least buy a slight possibility of a set-up.

bobke said:

I've often thought, what if the riders should take their own urines at the same time under a separate chain of custody and preserve them under rider funded scrutiny...

"Split Sampling" is exactly how the US (and state) EPA(s) conducts audit sampling inspections at private facilities they regualte. One sample goes to the EPA funded lab and one sample goes to a sperate privately funded labs (and even lab techs). The results are then compared. You'd be surprised by the variation between labs (and even lab techs). It generally doesn't raise any eyebrows, until one (either) of the samples comes in above regulatory limits.

EDIT: In reality there should be no more than 10% variation between identical samples in a certified lab...

L

Lampshade said:

There is no viable reason, as far as I can see, as to WHY they would do it.

Having their champion accused of cheating can be nothing but bad. The headlines out there are not condemning all American cyclists as cheats, they're condemning all cyclists as cheats.

If it was Armstrong I could at least buy a slight possibility of a set-up.

It´s easier to imagine a set up with landis:p .
If it were lance it would be a failed doping scheme by ferrari😄

My_Aching_Fiets said:

[HTML][/HTML] OK, don't flame me before reading the whole thing.

First of all, I'm not denying that cycling has way too many cheats and crooks, and Landis COULD very well be one of them.

BUT...

Of the following two scenarios, which sounds more plausible:

1) The overall favorite of the TdF, knowing full well that he will have to drop trou and take a whiz-quiz, decides to dope anyway, essentially proving himself dumber than the dumbest NFL lineman in history.

-or-

2) The powers that be in European cycling, being fed up with yet another American champion, drop a neat little wad of Euros on the table of the "independent" testing lab and, with a nod and a wink, eliminate the American champion by essentially "buying" a positive test for Landis.

Seriously, what checks are in place to ensure that the TESTING process is "clean"? Corruption in sports tends to run deeper amongst the actual organizations than the athletes themselves.

Oh my gosh, number 2 is definitely more plausible. I mean, how hard would it be for Frenchie to spike Landis’ pee after what they did to Tyler, Lance, and Roberto (they had to get him because he used to ride for USPS!!)?? I mean, with Tyler, Frenchie spiked three separate tests with someone else’s blood and then secretly inserted forged files into Dr. Fuentes files. And with Lance, Frenchie paid off Andreau, O’Reilly, and others to lie and spiked his pee with EPO. Frenchie is very devious and all American cyclists ALWAYS race clean.

My_Aching_Fiets said:

[HTML][/HTML]
1) The overall favorite of the TdF, knowing full well that he will have to drop trou and take a whiz-quiz, decides to dope anyway, essentially proving himself dumber than the dumbest NFL lineman in history.

Not to take this too far off topic, but NFL offensive lineman, as a group, have higher IQ test scores than any other position on the football team, including quarterbacks. Don't know how they stack up in comparison to the general population, but most are college graduates, so you know they have to be smart to get passing grades 🙄

Mark

tcklyde said:

Oh my gosh, number 2 is definitely more plausible. I mean, how hard would it be for Frenchie to spike Landis’ pee after what they did to Tyler, Lance, and Roberto (they had to get him because he used to ride for USPS!!)?? I mean, with Tyler, Frenchie spiked three separate tests with someone else’s blood and then secretly inserted forged files into Dr. Fuentes files. And with Lance, Frenchie paid off Andreau, O’Reilly, and others to lie and spiked his pee with EPO. Frenchie is very devious and all American cyclists ALWAYS race clean.

And let's not forget they had be as prepared as the cops were at 5 in the morning when they suddenly decided to frame OJ. Since everyone was already expecting Landis to win that stage, right? So they were ready to spike that pee by golly. I know, I know, they did it later. Like in the crime lab. With OJ.

teetopkram said:

Not to take this too far off topic, but NFL offensive lineman, as a group, have higher IQ test scores than any other position on the football team, including quarterbacks. Don't know how they stack up in comparison to the general population, but most are college graduates, so you know they have to be smart to get passing grades 🙄

Mark

Umm, I went to a Big 8 college, and they don't even have to know how to read....

Powerful Pete said:

The real question is: was it a French lab tech working in LA or not?

Perhaps OJ works at the French lab in question?

Our coach always used to say on offense the closer you are to the ball, the more intelligent you need to be. As a moderately stupid TE it always seemed to be true.

I don't like the whole procedure. First, the rules state that test results shouldn't have been revealed to the public before both A and B samples have been tested and verified. Oops, I did it again, another anti-doping rule that is apparantly only a recommendation.

Secondly, we are talking about a cyclist's career here, not conspiracy, so I think where even the remote possibility of chain of custody claim or tampering exists, every effort should be made to mitigate the risk of such an occurance. Consequently, I think the A and B samples should have been separated in the field and sent to different laboratories. The fact that the same French lab (which was at least complicit through poor controls in leaking confidential test results for Armstrong) is responsible for conducting and assuring the fairness of both the A and B test would not make me happy if my butt was on the line.

The lack of due process, inadequate checks and balances, pitiful leadership within the cycling organizations and WADA is a cause of consternation. Doesn't exculpate Landis, but doesn't fill me with confidence in the way professional cycling handles such matters either.

allegroman said:

I don't like the whole procedure. First, the rules state that test results shouldn't have been revealed to the public before both A and B samples have been tested and verified. Oops, I did it again, another anti-doping rule that is apparantly only a recommendation.

Secondly, we are talking about a cyclist's career here, not conspiracy, so I think where even the remote possibility of chain of custody claim or tampering exists, every effort should be made to mitigate the risk of such an occurance. Consequently, I think the A and B samples should have been separated in the field and sent to different laboratories. The fact that the same French lab (which was at least complicit through poor controls in leaking confidential test results for Armstrong) is responsible for conducting and assuring the fairness of both the A and B test would not make me happy if my butt was on the line.

The lack of due process, inadequate checks and balances, pitiful leadership within the cycling organizations and WADA is a cause of consternation. Doesn't exculpate Landis, but doesn't fill me with confidence in the way professional cycling handles such matters either.

Thanks for the insightful reply. I KNEW there were people on this forum who didn't immediately turn to flinging dung whenever a new thread was opened!

I agree with you (and the "rule", apparently) that the results of the A test should not be made public until the B sample has confirmed.

The bottom line is, positive or not, Landis' career has been tarnished irreparably.

nns1400 said:

Umm, I went to a Big 8 college, and they don't even have to know how to read....

Yeah, I'm gonna have to call BS on that one too.

My_Aching_Fiets said:

The bottom line is, positive or not, Landis' career has been tarnished irreparably.

I hate it when doping cyclists have their careers tarnished.

Just look what happened to Tyler: he cheated repeatedly and then lied about it and now people are calling him a cheater and a liar. How is that fair?

nns1400 said:

Do the French need to see their tour go down in disgrace? Which is happening. This is like Tonya Harding whacking Nancy Kerrigan and then totally sucking in the Olympics. She would have had to use that crow bar a few more times before she could have won. Landis being stripped would give them a Spanish champion. Did the French even make the top 10 on GC? Were they gonna get Pereiro, then Kloden, then Sastre....Or are you saying other Euros are okay with them. What about Australia? That's kind of a gray area, I suppose. If Landis could not win without doping, then he would "need to" more than they need to outright fabricate results. I am not saying he did it, but I am saying that the French conspiracy thing is getting old. Personally I feel that is giving them a large benefit of the doubt regarding the competence to do so. (was that comment American enough for you schwagger?)

Very generous of you.

Look the situation is quite clear : Landis failed a test with his A-sample.
The B-sample will confirm the A-sample result.

Landis isn't a victim of any conspiracy.
Re-view stage 16 and then stage 17 : what happened is clear for all to see.

There is no large benefit of doubt to be attributed to any laboratory.

As regards results in recents T'sDF : France has the third highest number of riders finishing in the top 10 : in recent years : Frances lags behind Germany/Italy/Pain but is ahead of the USA, Switzerland in terms of having the most finishers on GC in their national tour.

limerickman said:

As regards results in recents T'sDF : France has the third highest number of riders finishing in the top 10 : in recent years : Frances lags behind Germany/Italy/Pain but is ahead of the USA, Switzerland in terms of having the most finishers on GC in their national tour.

Let's hope......since the US only had a handful (I think it is 6 or 7) of riders competing.

Conspiracy? Highly unlikely - this hurts the French more than anyone, as the Tour brings in a huge chunk of change. Cycling fans everywhere were set to welcome back the annual festival, until this happened. France is the big loser in this mess.

McQuaid said that he was going public early because he didn't trust the LNDD lab to keep their mouths shut. Not an unreasonable suspicion, given past actvities at that lab. Hell of a way to conduct professional cycling - trust the lab to wreck careers, but not to protect confidentiality and due process. What's wrong with that picture? Bad character is bad character, whether they are testing or talking about it.

In any case, let us assume that the B sample matches the A sample. Now, Floyd has to prove that his levels occurred as part of a natural biological process, not with outside assistance. Since he was recently in yellow before stage 17, and I would assume that samples exist from the start of the Tour, establishing a pattern shouldn't be hard to do.

Who knows? You might see him bonking on Alpe d'Huez all over again to reproduce the conditions. A few cyclists have cleared their names of EPO charges when they proved that their body, under certain circumstances, would produce natural EPO that triggered a false positive. Floyd being exonerated is not outside the realm of possibility.

JohnO said:

Conspiracy? Highly unlikely - this hurts the French more than anyone, as the Tour brings in a huge chunk of change. Cycling fans everywhere were set to welcome back the annual festival, until this happened. France is the big loser in this mess.

McQuaid said that he was going public early because he didn't trust the LNDD lab to keep their mouths shut. Not an unreasonable suspicion, given past actvities at that lab. Hell of a way to conduct professional cycling - trust the lab to wreck careers, but not to protect confidentiality and due process. What's wrong with that picture? Bad character is bad character, whether they are testing or talking about it.

In any case, let us assume that the B sample matches the A sample. Now, Floyd has to prove that his levels occurred as part of a natural biological process, not with outside assistance. Since he was recently in yellow before stage 17, and I would assume that samples exist from the start of the Tour, establishing a pattern shouldn't be hard to do.

Who knows? You might see him bonking on Alpe d'Huez all over again to reproduce the conditions. A few cyclists have cleared their names of EPO charges when they proved that their body, under certain circumstances, would produce natural EPO that triggered a false positive. Floyd being exonerated is not outside the realm of possibility.

There have been cases where athletes proved that their body under certain circumstances produced higher testosterone than normal. However, I am pretty sure that in order for that to be plausible the ratio should not exceed 7:1 with the old rules and with the new ones (of 4:1) should be even lower. I don't think that there is any chance for a court to accept that a ratio of 11:1 is possible without drug use. Moreover, it's not something that happens overnight and I don't think that the body of a 32 yr old can suddenly produce that much testosterone or that kind of fluctuations out of the blue. I mean he should have been aware of this, he has been tested many times. Now suddenly, after the most incredible recovery in the recent history of TDF this happens... Too much of a coincidence...

JohnO said:

Conspiracy?

Who knows? You might see him bonking on Alpe d'Huez all over again to reproduce the conditions. A few cyclists have cleared their names of EPO charges when they proved that their body, under certain circumstances, would produce natural EPO that triggered a false positive. Floyd being exonerated is not outside the realm of possibility.

He has to explain how his testosterone level was three times higher than normal.

He has his work cut out.