Landis is a cheeky f%^&er
- Thread starter tiogar
- Start date
Hmmm... a lady who knows her hand guns, sort of. And cycling.nns1400 said:
Well, well. I'm going to set my computer screen next to me on the couch and put my arm around it and type sweet little nothings to it: "You have nice ventilation ducts. May I adjust your contrast? My, you have a nice figure, so... square."
Back off, dex. I'm going to have nns1400 in the virtual sack before this thread is over.dexjava said:
So, back to Landis.nns1400 said:As far as I'm concerned this thread is over. Nice chatting with you guys. bye!
As for FL back pedaling, coming up with smoke screens, whatever you want to call it, "ITS NOTHING NEW", every other cyclist under suspicion, caught or failed tests has done the same, denies,denies,denies, & he who comes up with the most original gets my vote for creatism. So go easy on FL he's only doing what everyone else has been doing for decades.
So go easy on FL he's only doing what everyone else has been doing for decades. 
It must be nice to live a binary existance, makes things easy.nns1400 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 a chain of custody claim or tampering exists, every effort should be made to mitigate the risk of such an occurance. If procedures were rigorous, 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.
dexjava said:
Landis mother shouldn't be subjected to harassement.
By all means go after the rider - but they ought to leave his family out of it.
I don't think that is accurate. I'm not sure and don't care to look it up but I don't think that is accurate. There many examples of athletes that their test results became public without having tested both samples.allegroman said:
Secondly, it was his team that made it public.
Floyd shouldn't take it personally - Ullrich and Basso have had their careers hammered, without a hearing, court action, due process, or even evidence that mentions either of them directly for that matter.
Sure, there is an indirect association from Ullrich to Fuentes, via Pevenage, but let's be honest here - Jan has been seriously hammered without benefit of due process, confronting his accusers in court, or even cross examination. And he's looking more like a victim of circumstance with every passing day.
Sure, there is an indirect association from Ullrich to Fuentes, via Pevenage, but let's be honest here - Jan has been seriously hammered without benefit of due process, confronting his accusers in court, or even cross examination. And he's looking more like a victim of circumstance with every passing day.
allegroman said:
Here, this should clear a few things up. Let's give a warm welcome to whiteboytrash:
whiteboytrash said:
See, there's a whole other level to Floyd's leak (no pun intended).
