Floyd and Si.com ("Floyd denies cheating")

Bob in CT said:

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2006/writers/austin_murphy/07/27/landis.react/index.html?cnn=yes

--
Bob in CT

Thanks. Nice article.

Bob in CT said:

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2006/writers/austin_murphy/07/27/landis.react/index.html?cnn=yes

From this article:

"Landis told me he "can't be hopeful" that the B sample will be any
different than the A. "I'm a realist," he said."

I really hope that Landis is clean. However, the realistic part of me
says that he probably isn't, sadly. I'm struck by the idea that if I
were in Landis's shoes, and I knew I was clean, I would hope against
all hope that the B sample would prove my innocence. That comment
above leads the cynic in me to think that Landis is already working to
spin the forthcoming second test -- an effort to lower expectations.
I hope I'm wrong.

-Bryan

--
remove the "REMOVE" from my email to email

Bryan K. Walton said:

Bob in CT said:

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2006/writers/austin_murphy/07/27/landis.react/index.html?cnn=yes

From this article:

"Landis told me he "can't be hopeful" that the B sample will be any
different than the A. "I'm a realist," he said."

I really hope that Landis is clean. However, the realistic part of me
says that he probably isn't, sadly. I'm struck by the idea that if I
were in Landis's shoes, and I knew I was clean, I would hope against
all hope that the B sample would prove my innocence. That comment
above leads the cynic in me to think that Landis is already working to
spin the forthcoming second test -- an effort to lower expectations.
I hope I'm wrong

+1

pc said:

Bob in CT said:

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2006/writers/austin_murphy/07/27/landis.react/index.html?cnn=yes

--
Bob in CT

Thanks. Nice article.

Yes, pretty much where all fans are at...

Bryan K. Walton said:

Bob in CT said:

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2006/writers/austin_murphy/07/27/landis.react/index.html?cnn=yes

From this article:

"Landis told me he "can't be hopeful" that the B sample will be any
different than the A. "I'm a realist," he said."

I really hope that Landis is clean. However, the realistic part of me
says that he probably isn't, sadly. I'm struck by the idea that if I
were in Landis's shoes, and I knew I was clean, I would hope against
all hope that the B sample would prove my innocence. That comment
above leads the cynic in me to think that Landis is already working to
spin the forthcoming second test -- an effort to lower expectations.
I hope I'm wrong.

-Bryan

Unless the B sample all of a sudden shows the testosterone levels to be
much lower it proves nothing.

It could then prove (show) that either the A test or the B test is
wrong, so why not do a C test then to settle the case?

And then if it is still high look at his previous test. ratio levels.

-Ken

"k.papai" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Bryan K. Walton said:

Bob in CT said:

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2006/writers/austin_murphy/07/27/landis.react/index.html?cnn=yes

From this article:

"Landis told me he "can't be hopeful" that the B sample will be any
different than the A. "I'm a realist," he said."

I really hope that Landis is clean. However, the realistic part of me
says that he probably isn't, sadly. I'm struck by the idea that if I
were in Landis's shoes, and I knew I was clean, I would hope against
all hope that the B sample would prove my innocence. That comment
above leads the cynic in me to think that Landis is already working to
spin the forthcoming second test -- an effort to lower expectations.
I hope I'm wrong.

-Bryan

Unless the B sample all of a sudden shows the testosterone levels to be
much lower it proves nothing.

It could then prove (show) that either the A test or the B test is
wrong, so why not do a C test then to settle the case?

And then if it is still high look at his previous test. ratio levels.

He was tested several times earlier in the Tour. Presumably he was a 6:1 or
less. As another poster linked, there apparently are ways to determine if
the high ratio is natural or manipulated. If that's the case, Landis'
Spanish doctor now on the case will undoubtedly do the appropriate testing.
Of all the "traditional" positives that could come up, this is one with a
higher percentage of proving the athlete did no wrong. Let's hope that's
the case here.

B. Lafferty said:

"k.papai" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Bryan K. Walton said:

On 2006-07-27, Bob in CT <[email hidden]> wrote:
> http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2006/writers/austin_murphy/07/27/landis.react/index.html?cnn=yes

From this article:

"Landis told me he "can't be hopeful" that the B sample will be any
different than the A. "I'm a realist," he said."

I really hope that Landis is clean. However, the realistic part of me
says that he probably isn't, sadly. I'm struck by the idea that if I
were in Landis's shoes, and I knew I was clean, I would hope against
all hope that the B sample would prove my innocence. That comment
above leads the cynic in me to think that Landis is already working to
spin the forthcoming second test -- an effort to lower expectations.
I hope I'm wrong.

-Bryan

Unless the B sample all of a sudden shows the testosterone levels to be
much lower it proves nothing.

It could then prove (show) that either the A test or the B test is
wrong, so why not do a C test then to settle the case?

And then if it is still high look at his previous test. ratio levels.

He was tested several times earlier in the Tour. Presumably he was a 6:1 or
less. As another poster linked, there apparently are ways to determine if
the high ratio is natural or manipulated. If that's the case, Landis'
Spanish doctor now on the case will undoubtedly do the appropriate testing.
Of all the "traditional" positives that could come up, this is one with a
higher percentage of proving the athlete did no wrong. Let's hope that's
the case here.

The have recently lowered the cut off levle to 4:1 and there is a case
from running that is contending that that level is too low and
seemingly successfully so far.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/athletics/5191942.stm

It all depends on what his his magic ratio was and what it has been
throughout his cycling history.

Bob in CT said:

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2006/writers/austin_murphy/07/27/landis.react/index.html?cnn=yes

I believe him when he says that he was "surprised".
Surprised because probably his DS had got the word from the organizer
that it would be OK.

On Fri, 28 Jul 2006 12:54:14 +1200, Stu Fleming <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

Bob in CT said:

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2006/writers/austin_murphy/07/27/landis.react/index.html?cnn=yes

I believe him when he says that he was "surprised".
Surprised because probably his DS had got the word from the organizer
that it would be OK.

"organizer" being the organizer of the doping program I suppose ?