From Lance to Landis: Inside the American Doping Controversy at the Tour de France (H

[helmutRoole2]

No one, mind you, has reported seeing Landis with a patch or any other testosterone product.

What? You mean he wasn't standing out in the town square with a testosterone patch on his nuts yelling, "Hey everyone! Look at me! I'm doping!"

Kasilof biathlete Jay Hakkinen -- the best American athlete no one has ever heard of -- could have used the latter drug. It might have brought him an Olympic medal in Turin; he was that close. But Hakkinen doesn't drug. I don't think any of the Alaska Olympians do, but there's no way to know for certain.

What the hell kind of homer statement is this? Alaskan athletes don't dope because... well, because they're from Alaska? Had I been his editor I would have done him the favor of deleting this paragraph.

In fact, one of the world's top authorities on testosterone later seemed to say there are no indications it helps recovery.

Then why is it on the list of banned substances? To believe that testosterone doesn't help recovery is moronic.

Landis, of course, told others about this conversation with Lemond. How could (he) not?

By keeping his mouth shut? Maybe?

Look, Landis told his friend, a guy he's known for years. Landis knew him well enough to understand that he wouldn't keep his mouth shut. And then to sit there while this friend called Lemond on the phone? Making what a least seemed a veiled threat? To sit there and let it happen? To not stop it?

At what point does Landis' moral compass kick in? At what point does his brain kick in?

Lemond is right. That event is very telling of Landis' character. As is his obviously doped performance on stage 17. He is a pile of **** and an idiot.

Think what you will of Lemond, but he didn't deserve to be outed.

 

[Eldrack]

Good article. USADA really should have stuck to science, after all that's what this is about. Whether or not the results of the tests performed by the anti doping agency's indicate that Landis either doped or didn't dope. USADA to argue the former, Landis's defence team the later.

Hopefully it will be the science that the verdict is formed on, and USADA's amatuer smear tactics won't destroy the validity of their scientific case. But whatever the verdict I'll be will to accept it.

Of course Landis could well have been taking EP/Blood doping, but there's no real test for that is there.

 

[Eldrack]

Then why is it on the list of banned substances? To believe that testosterone doesn't help recovery is moronic.

Testosterone is on the list of banned substances because it is/was believed to be performance enhancing. Until there is solid evidence to refute this claim (which doesn't really have that much scientific backing) then it will stay on the list, just in case as it were.

 

[helmutRoole2]

Testosterone is on the list of banned substances because it is/was believed to be performance enhancing. Until there is solid evidence to refute this claim (which doesn't really have that much scientific backing) then it will stay on the list, just in case as it were.

Then why is it regarded as the cadilac of performance enhancers? Why is it that underground labs can't keep it in stock. Why is that, with every admission of peds use, when the rider goes down the list of drugs he/she has consumed, testosterone is on that list?

Point is, if it doesn't work, then why does every athlete using peds do it?

 

[Bro Deal]

Why is that, with every admission of peds use, when the rider goes down the list of drugs he/she has consumed, testosterone is on that list?

Point is, if it doesn't work, then why does every athlete using peds do it?

Exactly. Landis was stupid to make the argument that he wouldn't take T because it wouldn't do any good. First off, it does not matter if red Koolaid is banned; if you get caught drinking it then you get sanctioned. Second, as you mention, authorities keep find various T products when they find stashes of dope. Riders have confessed to using it for recovery. A study just came out that confirms that HGH taken in combination with testosterone has an effect.

Landis damaged his own credibility with his bogus claim.

That article was dog ****. It sounds like it was written by the true believers over at "trust but verify."

 

[helmutRoole2]

First off, it does not matter if red Koolaid is banned; if you get caught drinking it then you get sanctioned.

Right. Why would someone take something that could only get you sanctioned?

 

[Eilert Pilarm]

What the hell kind of homer statement is this? Alaskan athletes don't dope because... well, because they're from Alaska? Had I been his editor I would have done him the favor of deleting this paragraph.

didn't take long for Medred's writing to **** you off a little.
Didn't take me long either. When I first read his stuff 10 years ago my first thought was, ''What an arrogant asshat this guy is!''
but the more you read him and the more you learn what he does out there, i've come to the conclusion that he knows what he's writing about re. all the Alaska Outdoors stuff, and i'll agree with him more than disagree.

PLUS--his articles are in the opinion/op-ed category so he can spew whatever he wishes---to a point i'm sure depending on his editor. But in the paragraph you referenced, I didn't take his context to mean that Alaska athletes don't cheat BECAUSE they're from Alaska. Anchorage is literally in a bowl and the Alaska Olympic/World Class caliber athletes are very few, so everyone seems to know them by name, so up in Anchorage the athletes are kind of in a bowl too, the proverbial fishbowl. So I took that angle as Craig's context that he may have started with when talking about the Alaska athletes.
jmho

 

[Leafer]

I didn't really like Landis or dislike him until the case was put on trial. Now I like him.
And yes, I too believe Lemond has issues. But I thought that before he won the TDF. It's good to see that I'm not the only one to think that.

And can any of the Lemond fans explain as to why Lemond is involved in either the LA insurance case or the Landis case?

Isn't he suppose to go away after a few years of winning the TDF?

Oh yeah....... No matter what the outcome of the Landis trial is, I will trade a World's jersey [not actual race worn] that Lemond had signed for me for a Landis jersey of any kind......
Mennonite madness!!!!!!!!

Why is it that I'm not in the least bit surprised that you like the dopers more than the people trying to get them out of the sport and the one Tour winner with no dirt on him?

 

[whiteboytrash]

Why is it that I'm not in the least bit surprised that you like the dopers more than the people trying to get them out of the sport and the one Tour winner with no dirt on him?

Wolf is bored. He loves trying this stuff on and you blokes take the bait. He loves to **** stir those who get fired up about doping... he doesn't care either way.... his next post will be about what a nice guy Uncle Ron is and LeMond needs more prank calls and will publish his home number...... come on wolf give the crowd a break....

 

[wolfix]

Your right, I really don't care what they do, as long as there is racing. What I think is ridiculous is the posters that claim they love a clean TDF...... They don't have a clue. They have never seen a clean TDF.
Al I know is this......I loved the sport of cycling. But this **** the last few years has been really a bore. Does anyone really think that cycling is going to be cleaned up?
We do not even know who won the 1996 or the 2006 TDF and there is a big cloud over the 2007 Giro winner. And Basso's wins in the Giro..... Chances are good JU victory will be removed.
And who has major doubts about Andy S and his place on the podium in the Giro ? Everyone of us. Are we seeing a doper, or are we seeing the next great rider?
Think of the cloud hanging over Boonen's head as we gwet close to the TDF...... Is he or isn't he? That was a pile of dope found today. And wasn't it a relative's house that it was found at?
In Disneyland they could have dope free racing, but it will never be in France in July. So deal with it.

Of course I am a fan of the dopers...... and so is everyone else on this board. If you are a fan of procycling and have been for many years , you are a fan of doping. To think anything else is putting your head into tthe sand.
Any rider that wins anymore is going to have a black cloud over his head. There will be other major scandals along the way.
There isn't anyone here that wants doping, but it is the way cycling has been run since I have followed it. It is still being run by people that want all this to go away. It isn't the UCI and cycling powers that are discovering the dopers, it is the civil authorities. And why is that???????
Don't like dopers? Change your sport. Otherwise you will be disappointed down the road.

 

[patch70]

What I think is ridiculous is the posters that claim they love a clean TDF...... They don't have a clue. They have never seen a clean TDF.

Another stupid argument. Nobody says they love a clean TDF. They say they WANT a clean TDF. Which is completely sensible even if unrealistic. It is certainly better than being a doping apologist.

 

[wolfix]

I want to make sure I live to 100....sensible, but unrealistic.

What we have had the last few years in GT cycling is nothing but a futile exercise in pretending it is sport. What have the actual cycling bodies done to insure a clean TDF? Not much. With riders admitting guilt, the UCI is embarressed and going through the motions to make people think they will get a clean TDF.
What have we done to make cycling better by condemning all the past riders? We have stripped what little respect the sport had. Measures can be put in place to insure cleaner sport without destroying what we have.
After all this mess, we look like we will have the main contenders for the TDF starting under a cloud of suspicion already. The cycling powers could have contained this before the civil authorities became involved.
I want a clean TDF too...... It's just I do not see a sport where money is involved that requires physical conditioning that does not have a doping problem. And cycling is a sport of strenght. So doping is here to stay.
So patch70, realistically speaking......... how do you think cycling can cure this problem?

 

[patch70]

So patch70, realistically speaking......... how do you think cycling can cure this problem?

I wish I had a complete answer to that, I don't.

However, the first step is admitting the problem and quantifying it. At least cycling is making the first baby steps to admitting it has a problem, unlike athletics, baseball, football, etc.

Yes, this will lead to a negative image of cycling in the press while it is the only sport to admit the problem but maybe, just maybe from that a cleaner sport can arise from the ashes. And maybe other sports will follow too.

However, as long as the big sposorship dollars want victory above all else, I'm probably going to continue to be a dreamer...

 

[Bro Deal]

So patch70, realistically speaking......... how do you think cycling can cure this problem?

Longitudinal testing would be a start. That's how T-Mobile caught Gonchar. It's also the reason for the lack of French results since 1998.

 

[whiteboytrash]

Longitudinal testing would be a start. That's how T-Mobile caught Gonchar. It's also the reason for the lack of French results since 1998.

Agreed. Although I hate printing articles in full this interview with Patrice Clerc from ASO is excellent. As you can see ASO and not the UCI are the only ones taking this doping issue seriously.
__________

Bicycling: Did you expect the doping problem to be so deep?

Patrice Clerc : All I know is that this sport has an enormous potential. It has the values that can make it one of the world's great sports. But today we are at a crossroads. Either we redevelop this sport and give it a new heart, or we continue with the little scams and scandals of the past. Festina back in 1998, Operation Puerto last year and another scandal in three of four years, and the sport will never be the great sport it deserves to be.

It's true that, in a sense, we went looking for some of the problems we are facing, because we didn't want to run any more. And we're trying to flush out the problem of doping once and for all.

If we wanted to play like the previous UCI President (i.e. Hein Verbruggen) and say, "oh there is no problem...our athletes are the most tested etc., etc." I think we'd really have a lot to be guilty of today. But instead we have really gone after the problem. It's been hard. It's been very sad for the sport and even economically difficult, but it's necessary and we asked for it because we want to go to the root of the problem.

We saw in the 1990's the development of a doping system that was constructed for nearly everyone in the peloton. But then in 1998, it all came crashing down with the Festina Affair. But instead of solving the problem once and for all, we saw it come back with Operation Puerto.

Today is different. There are a lot of clean riders, but we did see the doping system recreate itself and with a lot of the top riders. But why did it recreate itself? How did it get started again? These are the questions we need to ask. We have to know these things if we are going to prevent it from happening again.

Bicycling: I've spoken about the doping problem a lot with British cyclist David Millar, who after being caught for doping and serving a heavy sentence, is now committed to being one of the strongest voices in the fight against doping. One thing he said recently that was interesting, and it seems to go along with what you are saying, is that one problem we face is that, when somebody is caught up in a doping scandal, they are virtually excorcised from the sport. But what we really need is to figure out a way to learn from these people, to better understand why and how people are doping.

Patrice Clerc : "Oui," Yes, completely, I agree completely.

Bicycling: That's why I'm a bit confused with your recent statements, and those of your colleague, Christian Prudhomme. In the recent T-Mobile affair, I find Bjarne Riis' statement and testimony to be the most believable. Unlike say Erik Zabel, who said, "I doped but only for two weeks," something that may or may not be true, Riis said simply yes I doped for a large part of my career. But while nobody has questioned whether Zabel, who won seven green jerseys, can start the Tour or not, both Christian and yourself have said you would be shocked if Riis was at the Tour.

Barring somebody for something that happened nearly 10 years ago seems inconsistent with the idea we just spoke about, that of learning from the these people about their mistakes...

Patrice Clerc : No what I have said, was not clear in the press. What I have said, or wanted to say, officially, is that what happened in
1996 doesn't interest me. I mean yes it interests me because it is regrettable that in our books we must now erase Mr. Bjarne Riis as Tour winner in 1996, but we're not going to put down Mr. Jan Ullrich, or Mr. Richard Virenque, or Mr. Laurent Dufaux either. It bothers me because that means that 1997 doesn't have a winner either (i.e. Jan Ullrich was on the T-Mobile team as well and has now been linked through blood tests to the Spanish Puerto Affair), 1998 doesn't have
a winner either (i.e. Marco Pantani later failed an EPO test) and
1999 and the years followed doesn't have a winner either (i.e. traces
of EPO were later found in several of Lance Armstrong's urine samples
from that year, although no "B" samples remained to confirm the tests)...and what about Indurain?

Bicycling: So you would be willing to erase say five years of Tour
de France results?

Patrice Clerc : Yes, no problem.

Bicycling: Or 10 or 15 ?

Patrice Clerc : (laughs) You know, I don't come from cycling. It's not my sport so the results don't mean the same thing as to someone that has always followed it.

But say in the in the case of Riis, what really interests me is what is happening today with his team. If he tells me, "Since I have been at the head of the CSC team this is what I have done, and I've done like David Millar, I've tried to reconstruct something." That works fine for me.

In contrast, however, I know that he was the director of Tyler
Hamilton, who won the stage of the 2003 Tour into Bayonne with a broken collarbone, I know that he was the manager of Mr. Basso, who flattened the 2006 Tour of Italy. And if he makes no attempt to explain what happened with those riders (Hamilton tested positive for blood transfusions when he was on the Phonak team in 2004 and Basso has admitted his involvement in the Puerto Affair) while they were on his team, then I have a problem.

And that's what bothers me. I need to know that those in charge of teams today did not participate in the reconstruction of a doping system after the Festina Affair in 1998.

Bicycling : Two days ago I was riding with Sean Kelly and asked him the same basic question. And he said, "Yeah, it is possible. Just like it was possible for Patrick Lefevere (manager of Quickstep) not to know about his star rider Johan Museeuw doping. It is possible that Riis didn't know. Teams can provide their own doctors and trainers, but individual riders can still be going to another doctor from the outside every week."

Patrice Clerc : I'd like to believe everybody and I'm not here to say I like you, you can ride. I don't like you, you can't ride. Once again, it doesn't bother me that Rolf Aldag is at the Tour, that Erik Zabel is at the Tour...that was yesterday. What interests me is today and tomorrow.

Bicycling : So you could see a scenario in which Riis is at the Tour?

Patrice Clerc : Yes of course. What I said did not come out clearly
in L'Equipe. What I wanted to say is that if Bjarne Riis shows up at the start of the Tour in London without any explanation then I'm shocked, I'm bothered. The manager of Ivan Basso, Tyler Hamilton, who admits that doping was a daily habit for several years, must give me a better explanation as to what has happened within his own team, than what I have heard so far. I need to know. I need to know whether it is possible to put together the world's best team (they have been ranked number one for the past two years) and not know about doping within the team, something which is plenty serious or that he knew and did nothing. And in that case he is not welcome. Again, what happened in 1996 doesn't really interest me. It is today. If I know that he has done like Millar, that is to say, whether he did some stupid things in the past but has since changed, or whether he did stupid things as a rider and has continued as a manager. That is the question. It's the only question.

Bicycling: I visited Jens Voigt in Berlin a couple of weeks ago and
he explained to me the new anti-doping measures the team has taken. They are working with an independent lab that does a number of out-of-competition testings on all the riders and sends them to WADA and the UCI before the team itself sees them. It sounds very objective, so perhaps there have been some lessons learned...

Patrice Clerc : Well that's what we want to know. If Mr Riis tells me, "I realized that, despite my efforts, I was be taken advantage of by certain riders and have put a new, more rigid system into place," okay, I can work with that.

Bicycling : It's been over a year now since Operation Puerto broke.
Will it still haunt us in the Tour?

Patrice Clerc : Well today on the Spanish radio I heard Jose-Miguel
Echevarri (i.e. director of Caisse d'Epargne led by Alejandro Valverde, who is suspected of being invoved with Puerto as well) who was saying, "What right does the Tour de France have to say certain things about certain teams? There is a law, there are rules, there is a federation. I follow the rules, I follow the laws etc. and that's enough."

But we can't just live like that today, we can't say those kinds of things today. This sport is threatened. And the sport of cycling is threatened much more than the Tour de France because the Tour goes beyond sport. But the sport of cycling is threatened and we could lose our credibility very quickly. And I say this to all the sponsors and all the managers, "You have an enormous responsibility, we all have an enormous responsibility, but your responsibility is to hire riders that you are sure of. If you have any doubts about a rider, if
you're not 100 percent sure that your rider is not going to pose a problem in the biggest race in the world, you shouldn't bring him to the Tour. So I was astonished to hear Echevarri saying, "who does he take himself for ? Why is he always speaking about the Tour de France?"

What these people don't understand is that, since it is the biggest race in the world there is a lot more exposure. Everything that happens in the Tour is multiplied by 10, the good, but also the bad. And this year, after everything that happened in 2005 and 2006 with Heras, Basso and Landis (winners of the Tours of Spain, Italy and France who all have been involved in doping scandals) we can no longer permit to have a Tour de France with a problem. Echevarri is worried about Valverde. I have nothing against Valverde. He is without a doubt one of the best riders of his generation. But if Valverde comes to the Tour, wins the Tour, and then a couple of months later the Spanish judge says, "well in the end, blood sack number 18 was his," it is terrible for the whole sport. So what I am saying is that today, nobody in this sport can take the risk.

Bicycling: Are you afraid of creating a sort of Inquisition?

Patrice Clerc : By who?

Bicycling: No one in particular, but the movement by everyone, to have a good image puts in question basic things like the presumption of innocence and if it is not handled responsibly, can turn into a witch hunt.

Patrice Clerc: No, the problem today is that all results in all races are suspect. When Roger Federer wins a tennis tournament everyone says "Wow that's great." But when a young rider Andy Schleck has a good ride in the Tour of Italy we say, "Oh, I hope he's clean." Another young rider like Ricardo Ricco comes along and he certainly has talent, and he certainly has charecter, but that's not what we focus on because we're too busy asking questions. No we have to regain this credibility, this confidence. And it is possible.

This year's Tour is an enormous chance to do things differently. Last year's Tour was great for the first two weeks and then...Instead, last year's Tour turned out to be a catastrophe. If we didn't have the Landis Affair we would have already reconstructed a big part of the confidence.

Bicycling: For us, the Americans, it was even worse because the American public sees the Tour through the American champions.

Patrice Clerc : No, I can imagine. In addition, Johan Bruyneel made an enormous error in hiring Basso this year, an enormous error. He doesn't have a sponsor for next year does he? But there is also the new team that Jonathon Vaughters has put together. What he is doing is very interesting. He has ideas about riders actually basically living together outside of the races. It's interesting and we need people like that in the sport. I think Bob Stapleton, the new manager of T-Mobile, also has good ideas and the fact that he comes totally from outside the sport is interesting. Here in France we have Eric
Boyer at the Cofidis team and he too represents a real break from the past.

Bicycling: Are you confident for the 2007 Tour...or are you scared ?

Patrice Clerc: Of course I'm scared. But I want to believe that all the actors in cycling will take their responsibilities, be it the riders, the directors, the doctors. Everyone

 

[helmutRoole2]

Your right, I really don't care what they do, as long as there is racing. What I think is ridiculous is the posters that claim they love a clean TDF...... They don't have a clue. They have never seen a clean TDF.
Al I know is this......I loved the sport of cycling. But this **** the last few years has been really a bore. Does anyone really think that cycling is going to be cleaned up?
We do not even know who won the 1996 or the 2006 TDF and there is a big cloud over the 2007 Giro winner. And Basso's wins in the Giro..... Chances are good JU victory will be removed.
And who has major doubts about Andy S and his place on the podium in the Giro ? Everyone of us. Are we seeing a doper, or are we seeing the next great rider?
Think of the cloud hanging over Boonen's head as we gwet close to the TDF...... Is he or isn't he? That was a pile of dope found today. And wasn't it a relative's house that it was found at?
In Disneyland they could have dope free racing, but it will never be in France in July. So deal with it.

Of course I am a fan of the dopers...... and so is everyone else on this board. If you are a fan of procycling and have been for many years , you are a fan of doping. To think anything else is putting your head into tthe sand.
Any rider that wins anymore is going to have a black cloud over his head. There will be other major scandals along the way.
There isn't anyone here that wants doping, but it is the way cycling has been run since I have followed it. It is still being run by people that want all this to go away. It isn't the UCI and cycling powers that are discovering the dopers, it is the civil authorities. And why is that???????
Don't like dopers? Change your sport. Otherwise you will be disappointed down the road.

+1. However, I'm not a fan of how most athletes who come up snake eyes on a **** test handle it. Camazind and riders like him set the standard. One positive, one retirement, one no comment.

 

[wolfix]

+1. However, I'm not a fan of how most athletes who come up snake eyes on a **** test handle it. Camazind and riders like him set the standard. One positive, one retirement, one no comment.

I fully agree..or even worse then that is when they take from the sport, get caught, and then roll on the others in order to get lesser punishment.
The Tyler thing makes me sick. I would really love to know the truth behind Floyd. If anyone was innocent, I want to believe it would be him. But I wouldn't bet my Campy NR equipment on it.

 

[helmutRoole2]

Longitudinal testing would be a start. That's how T-Mobile caught Gonchar. It's also the reason for the lack of French results since 1998.

I have to believe, had Gonchar been 27-years-old rather than 37-years-old, we would have never heard about that longitudinal test result.

The problem is, the tests are designed to identify existing drugs, and right now there are designer peds in the peloton that we've never heard of.

Who was the British track-and-field (athletics) sprinter who tested positive? You know how he got caught? Someone who he was threatening in the rankings, who was also using the same designer steroid sent a sample of that steroid to WADA.

Well, you might wonder, wouldn't that get them both busted? Not if one of them had moved on to another undetectable steroid.

This is a very dirty game. Tyler Hamilton is probably still wondering how he got busted. Olympic champion, dog lover, aiming to de-thrown the (what was it?) six time Tour champion? Anyone want to venture a guess how that might have happened?

Drugs are ingrained in sports. The only difference between the UCI and the NFL is, the NFL is collectively smart enough to ignore the "problem."

Look people, there's nothing athletic about having more red blood cells than someone else... I guess that statement is a knife that cuts both ways.

 

[whiteboytrash]

Who was the British track-and-field (athletics) sprinter who tested positive? You know how he got caught? Someone who he was threatening in the rankings, who was also using the same designer steroid sent a sample of that steroid to WADA.

Dwain Chambers.... the needle was sent in by an opposing coach who was upset that his athletes had left him to a new coach and with a stockpile of "the clear".

 

[helmutRoole2]

Dwain Chambers.... the needle was sent in by an opposing coach who was upset that his athletes had left him to a new coach and with a stockpile of "the clear".

Can you re-post that article. To me it showed how impossible it is stop doping.