Reasonable Doping Strategies

"Dave Lee" <[email hidden]> a écrit dans le message de news:
[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Assuming that Landis did take testosterone prior to stage 17 (that is what
the evidence indicates), does this make any sense? He needed a miracle at
that point and if the truth is the same as what the available evidence
indicates, would any rational biker needing a miracle at that point chose
testosterone? My (limited) understanding of this stuff is that the effects
of doping with testosterone are primarily long term. There seems to be
some
anecdotal evidence of positive, short term effects (and maybe Floyd has
personal experience with the substance and had reason to believe that it
would be helpful) - maybe.

I'm just curious as to whether or not the most obvious interpretation of
the
available evidence makes any sense.

A related question. If Landis did take the drug surely he would know that
this was going to show up in testing down the road. In this case I would
expect anyone with an IQ higher than their age would be concocting a
better
story than the one that we have been hearing from the Landis crowd.

From my position of limited knowledge, the way this has played out doesn't
make sense. But I will admit that 'the French lab did it' seems equally
unlikely.

Thanks.

dave

Bonjour Dave,

This question was answered one week ago. I sugest you to read all the
message since the day of the A sample result

Montesquiou said:

Bonjour Dave,

This question was answered one week ago. I sugest you to read all the
message since the day of the A sample result

Give the guy a break. He may work for a living.

Steve

"Steven Bornfeld" <[email hidden]> a écrit dans le message de
news: [email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Montesquiou said:

Bonjour Dave,

This question was answered one week ago. I sugest you to read all the
message since the day of the A sample result

Give the guy a break. He may work for a living.

Steve

I think it is important.
Suppose he don't know that one can' say "The Landis problem" ?
; )

<Montesquiou> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"Steven Bornfeld" <[email hidden]> a écrit dans le message

de

Quoted message said:

news: [email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Montesquiou said:

Bonjour Dave,

This question was answered one week ago. I sugest you to read all the
message since the day of the A sample result

Give the guy a break. He may work for a living.

Steve

I think it is important.
Suppose he don't know that one can' say "The Landis problem" ?
; )

I don't understand your 'Landis problem' comment. But thank you so much for
the very useful suggestion that I read all of the messages since late July.
I will get right on that one just as soon as I have finished my complete
reading of all of wikapaedia.com.

dave

Dave Lee said:

<Montesquiou> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"Steven Bornfeld" <[email hidden]> a écrit dans le message

de

Quoted message said:

news: [email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Montesquiou wrote:

>Bonjour Dave,
>
>This question was answered one week ago. I sugest you to read all the
>message since the day of the A sample result

Give the guy a break. He may work for a living.

Steve

I think it is important.
Suppose he don't know that one can' say "The Landis problem" ?
; )

I don't understand your 'Landis problem' comment. But thank you so much for
the very useful suggestion that I read all of the messages since late July.
I will get right on that one just as soon as I have finished my complete
reading of all of wikapaedia.com.

dave

Don't bother. Taking testosterone as he has been charged makes little
sense. Some have chalked it up to desperation. So you have to believe
that he's either foolish or--he's foolish. I've spent more time than I
should have reading these posts--save your time. There's no logic to be
found, and the rationale (absent a confession--now unlikely since
lawyers are already involved) is not likely to emerge.

Steve

"Steven Bornfeld" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Dave Lee said:

<Montesquiou> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"Steven Bornfeld" <[email hidden]> a écrit dans le message

de

Quoted message said:

news: [email hidden]...

>
>Montesquiou wrote:
>
>>Bonjour Dave,
>>
>>This question was answered one week ago. I sugest you to read all the
>>message since the day of the A sample result
>
>Give the guy a break. He may work for a living.
>
>Steve
>

I think it is important.
Suppose he don't know that one can' say "The Landis problem" ?
; )

I don't understand your 'Landis problem' comment. But thank you so much

for

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

the very useful suggestion that I read all of the messages since late

July.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I will get right on that one just as soon as I have finished my complete
reading of all of wikapaedia.com.

dave

Don't bother. Taking testosterone as he has been charged makes little
sense. Some have chalked it up to desperation. So you have to believe
that he's either foolish or--he's foolish. I've spent more time than I
should have reading these posts--save your time. There's no logic to be
found, and the rationale (absent a confession--now unlikely since
lawyers are already involved) is not likely to emerge.

Steve

Thanks - I did spend some time on further reading of a portion of all the
posted stuff here on RBR. There was one explanation buried back there
somewhere that made some sense. The essense was that the entire cycling
profession (or at least Floyd) is on some kind of doping regimen which
includes the illegal substances plus other stuff that masks the illegal
stuff. Given that, the speculation is that Floyd simply screwed up and
failed to take the masking agent (or in this case it might well have been an
'enhancing agent'😉.

At least that line of reasoning is logical (IMHO).

dave

In article <[email hidden]>,

Dave Lee said:

I don't understand your 'Landis problem' comment. But thank you so much for
the very useful suggestion that I read all of the messages since late July.
I will get right on that one just as soon as I have finished my complete
reading of all of wikapaedia.com.

At least reading Wiki won't make your head explode. Well, much...

--
tanx,
Howard

Never take a tenant with a monkey.

remove YOUR SHOES to reply, ok?

On Sat, 05 Aug 2006 22:04:03 GMT, "Dave Lee" <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

<Montesquiou> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"Steven Bornfeld" <[email hidden]> a écrit dans le message

de

Quoted message said:

news: [email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Montesquiou wrote:
>
> Bonjour Dave,
>
> This question was answered one week ago. I sugest you to read all the
> message since the day of the A sample result

Give the guy a break. He may work for a living.

Steve

I think it is important.
Suppose he don't know that one can' say "The Landis problem" ?
; )

I don't understand your 'Landis problem' comment. But thank you so much for
the very useful suggestion that I read all of the messages since late July.
I will get right on that one just as soon as I have finished my complete
reading of all of wikapaedia.com.

Congratulations, you have reached the end of the internet.

The bottom line is that everyone else has figured that this makes absolutely no
sense whatever.

If Landis knowingly doped why did he go ahead win the stage and get busted. He
isn't especially well educated, but he ain't stupid and he sure as hell knows
how bike racing works.

It is considered unlikely that whoever at the lab who has been getting bribed by
l'Equipe to release positive results would take the next step and start creating
them.

In a sport that depends as heavily on cooperation as cycling, I would expect
that anyone hoping to win the tour would not dope noticeably more than his
competitors.

It is a mystery.

Ron

Dave Lee said:

"Steven Bornfeld" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Dave Lee said:

<Montesquiou> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

> "Steven Bornfeld" <[email hidden]> a écrit dans le message
de

> news: [email hidden]...
>
>> Montesquiou wrote:
>>
>>> Bonjour Dave,
>>>
>>> This question was answered one week ago. I sugest you to read all the
>>> message since the day of the A sample result
>> Give the guy a break. He may work for a living.
>>
>> Steve
>>
> I think it is important.
> Suppose he don't know that one can' say "The Landis problem" ?
> ; )
>

I don't understand your 'Landis problem' comment. But thank you so much

for

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

the very useful suggestion that I read all of the messages since late

July.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I will get right on that one just as soon as I have finished my complete
reading of all of wikapaedia.com.

dave

Don't bother. Taking testosterone as he has been charged makes little
sense. Some have chalked it up to desperation. So you have to believe
that he's either foolish or--he's foolish. I've spent more time than I
should have reading these posts--save your time. There's no logic to be
found, and the rationale (absent a confession--now unlikely since
lawyers are already involved) is not likely to emerge.

Steve

Thanks - I did spend some time on further reading of a portion of all the
posted stuff here on RBR. There was one explanation buried back there
somewhere that made some sense. The essense was that the entire cycling
profession (or at least Floyd) is on some kind of doping regimen which
includes the illegal substances plus other stuff that masks the illegal
stuff. Given that, the speculation is that Floyd simply screwed up and
failed to take the masking agent (or in this case it might well have been an
'enhancing agent'😉.

At least that line of reasoning is logical (IMHO).

dave

Or, concerning that for staying below the doping limits they have some
security margin, they just made this margin a little bit smaller just in
order to speed Floyd's recovery somewhat more. Maybe because there was a
real danger that he'd loose even more time the day after he bonked.

They just might not have expected his Epitestosterone level to be that
low, maybe because of the bonk. I doubt they are testing this. And the
combination of these two incidences led to the elevated T/E ratio.

What I like in this explanation is that it leaves intact the factor of
human strength and willpower in Floyd's ride on stage 17, which I still
think was a great achievement - doping or not.
And if you could dope in a way to make such a ride possible on a regular
basis with a real chance of not being caught, we'd see many more people
doing this.

Ernst Noch said:

Dave Lee said:

"Steven Bornfeld" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Dave Lee wrote:
> <Montesquiou> wrote in message
> news:[email hidden]...
>
>> "Steven Bornfeld" <[email hidden]> a écrit dans le message
> de
>
>> news: [email hidden]...
>>
>>> Montesquiou wrote:
>>>
>>>> Bonjour Dave,
>>>>
>>>> This question was answered one week ago. I sugest you to read all the
>>>> message since the day of the A sample result
>>> Give the guy a break. He may work for a living.
>>>
>>> Steve
>>>
>> I think it is important.
>> Suppose he don't know that one can' say "The Landis problem" ?
>> ; )
>>
>
> I don't understand your 'Landis problem' comment. But thank you so much

for

Quoted message said:

> the very useful suggestion that I read all of the messages since late

July.

Quoted message said:

> I will get right on that one just as soon as I have finished my complete
> reading of all of wikapaedia.com.
>
> dave
>
>

Don't bother. Taking testosterone as he has been charged makes little
sense. Some have chalked it up to desperation. So you have to believe
that he's either foolish or--he's foolish. I've spent more time than I
should have reading these posts--save your time. There's no logic to be
found, and the rationale (absent a confession--now unlikely since
lawyers are already involved) is not likely to emerge.

Steve

Thanks - I did spend some time on further reading of a portion of all the
posted stuff here on RBR. There was one explanation buried back there
somewhere that made some sense. The essense was that the entire cycling
profession (or at least Floyd) is on some kind of doping regimen which
includes the illegal substances plus other stuff that masks the illegal
stuff. Given that, the speculation is that Floyd simply screwed up and
failed to take the masking agent (or in this case it might well have been an
'enhancing agent'😉.

At least that line of reasoning is logical (IMHO).

dave

Or, concerning that for staying below the doping limits they have some
security margin, they just made this margin a little bit smaller just in
order to speed Floyd's recovery somewhat more. Maybe because there was a
real danger that he'd loose even more time the day after he bonked.

They just might not have expected his Epitestosterone level to be that
low, maybe because of the bonk. I doubt they are testing this. And the
combination of these two incidences led to the elevated T/E ratio.

What I like in this explanation is that it leaves intact the factor of
human strength and willpower in Floyd's ride on stage 17, which I still
think was a great achievement - doping or not.
And if you could dope in a way to make such a ride possible on a regular
basis with a real chance of not being caught, we'd see many more people
doing this.

Doping? I don't think we'll see a many more people riding like that, doped or
not. We've had a hundred years of doped riders and very few of them ever did
anything like that and the ones who could didn't do it often.

Nothing takes away from what we saw.

Ron