[email protected] wrote:
> Good point but I think if Landis came out it would start to sink into
> publics consciousness. Larry king is a pretty aggressive interviewer so
> i doubt if landis will withstand the questioning without Armstrongs
> support.
The public already understands a whole lot more than you give them
credit for.
Here's what one member of the public had to say recently:
(From:
<http://sports.yahoo.com/sc/news;_ylt=AkjAPsu35Ht0OnUvbzbUj_l.grcF?slug=ap-landis-lemond&prov=ap&type=lgns>
)
(TIny: <http://tinyurl.com/rdwqr> )
(Quoting):
<The way three-time Tour de France winner Greg LeMond sees it, 2006
champion Floyd Landis is already a victim.
<Even if his backup "B" sample comes back negative -- the results are
expected Saturday -- Landis will be tainted by unfounded claims that he
cheated.
<"If it does come back positive, that's even more tragic to me," LeMond
said, because the pressure to compete against those who are cheating
"takes good people and forces them to make tragic decisions.">
There's more. Sounds like Lemond has been doing some thinking. He even
says something that makes sense IRT his relationship with Lance
Armstrong at the end of the article.
When we get 100% perfect testing, this problem will be taken care of.
Until then, the "arms race" between athletes and testers will continue.
The athletes who are caught are scapegoats for an imperfect system that
does not punish those in power who institute the very, very bad rules
that sport, especially cycling, operate under.
The problem is the rules, not the riders. They're just human beings,
like you-- or how much money, or fame and social privilege, or your
name in the record books would it take to "tempt" you?
The lab that returned Landis' positive has a real problem with its
professional reputation after the "Lance EPO" affair, at the very
least. IOW, let's not suppose "the testers" themselves are pure as the
driven snow, OK? --D-y