*** SPOILER *** Interesting facts from Landis' book

[davidbod]

Or, just let Landis choose the lab, as he wanted. Didn't they want the lab at UCLA or something? If there exo-test in his urine, any lab should find it.

Yeah, I don't understand why they won't allow a different lab to test the results. They could have completely removed the conspiracy aspect of the case by allowing UCLA to do it. If it had been done this way and found positive it would even have given more credibility to LNDD regarding LA's EPO tests from the 99 tour.

 

[wolfix]

If we know the riders cannot be trusted, the UCI cannot be trusted, and the ASO cannot be trusted, why should we trust the lab, or anyone involved in cycling?
Isn't it great??????

 

[strummer_fan]

Yeah, I don't understand why they won't allow a different lab to test the results. They could have completely removed the conspiracy aspect of the case by allowing UCLA to do it. If it had been done this way and found positive it would even have given more credibility to LNDD regarding LA's EPO tests from the 99 tour.

If I recall, even the UCLA lab said that they didn't have the machine necessary to do the Carbon Isotope testing. There are only a handful of labs in the WADA system who can do this testing.

It makes sense that a race in France will use the national WADA Lab in France. What do you want to do... let every rider choose his own lab in his own country to fight every positive? How do you think Vino's blood would come back from an accredited lab in Kazakhstan? Will Iban Mayo ask to have his blood tested in a lab in the Basque region of Spain? Would you let him?

Floyd got busted. McQuaid is right... he should have taken the suspension... if he had, he'd only have 11 months to go.

 

[zap brannigan]

cycling seems to be one of these small time sports that are run for the benefit of the administrators so they can pretend to be napolean and lord over their petty empires and play politics and back stabbing games with each other.

it's about time the riders wised up and organised themselves into an effective union to look after their interests especially when it comes to money.

every other pro sport has taken this step especially in america where the players aren't affraid to go on strike and kill the season.......this is the type of attitude cyclists need to use instead of being sheep and taking it up the **** from these tin pot dictator administrators.
it's one out all out.

the riders should be getting about 25% of incmes revenue from tv and sponsorship going to salaries as in most other sports and there should be better guarantees of salaries being paid and also minimum base wages etc.

the riders should be in the best negotiating position........no riders = no tour.

 

[fbircher]

Yeah, I don't understand why they won't allow a different lab to test the results. They could have completely removed the conspiracy aspect of the case by allowing UCLA to do it. If it had been done this way and found positive it would even have given more credibility to LNDD regarding LA's EPO tests from the 99 tour.

Allowing UCLA to test the B samples might have provided some PR value to the uniformed public, but until we see some noteworthy cases of science professionals at accredited laboratories busted for conspiring to frame athletes and falsify results, there is simply no legitimate reason to object to LNDD testing the B samples. For those inclined to latch onto conspiracy theories, even a second positive result at a different lab would be open to conspiratorial interpretations (e.g., LNDD sent a “spiked” sample to UCLA to cover their falsification of the A sample, the staff at UCLA falsified the results to cover for their colleagues in France, etc.). You’re kidding yourself if you think a variation the testing protocol would “remove the conspiracy aspect” in the minds of people who want to believe such things.



Given the decades-long pattern of widespread doping, cheating and lying among the ranks of professional cyclists, and the utter lack of any such pattern of fraud among science professionals at accredited testing laboratories, any reasonable person will know who is likely to be telling the truth in this case. I don’t think there is a test protocol in the world that would change the mind of anyone willing to buy into such crackpot ideas in the first place.

 

[Crankyfeet]

Allowing UCLA to test the B samples might have provided some PR value to the uniformed public, but until we see some noteworthy cases of science professionals at accredited laboratories busted for conspiring to frame athletes and falsify results, there is simply no legitimate reason to object to LNDD testing the B samples. For those inclined to latch onto conspiracy theories, even a second positive result at a different lab would be open to conspiratorial interpretations (e.g., LNDD sent a “spiked” sample to UCLA to cover their falsification of the A sample, the staff at UCLA falsified the results to cover for their colleagues in France, etc.). You’re kidding yourself if you think a variation the testing protocol would “remove the conspiracy aspect” in the minds of people who want to believe such things.



Given the decades-long pattern of widespread doping, cheating and lying among the ranks of professional cyclists, and the utter lack of any such pattern of fraud among science professionals at accredited testing laboratories, any reasonable person will know who is likely to be telling the truth in this case. I don’t think there is a test protocol in the world that would change the mind of anyone willing to buy into such crackpot ideas in the first place.

Well said.

 

[Trev_S]

Floyd got busted. McQuaid is right... he should have taken the suspension... if he had, he'd only have 11 months to go.

The stupid thing is, if/when Landis is given a guilty verdict he will still only have that 11 months (from now). Pretty sure the 2yrs starts from last July/August?
Remember Hamilton fought for nearly 2yrs and only stopped (at least appeared to) when the 2yrs was just about up.
I think they should start the 2yrs after hearings have finished. Not from the date of the offense.
Might discourage guys from taking such a long time dragging it through court after court. If they just accept it & admit it they will be back on the road again sooner.

 

[wolfix]

cycling seems to be one of these small time sports that are run for the benefit of the administrators so they can pretend to be napolean and lord over their petty empires and play politics and back stabbing games with each other.

it's about time the riders wised up and organised themselves into an effective union to look after their interests especially when it comes to money.
the riders should be in the best negotiating position........no riders = no tour.

Best post of of August so far. The cycling powers are so inconsistent with everything. Cycling should tell the IOC to get lost too.

 

[Gregers]

Best post of of August so far. QUOTE]
That's a very low bar on here.

 

[SaintAndrew]

what floyd writes is somewhat intriguing, but from a a quick logical do you really think that the uci is going to put a massive black mark on the biggest thing in cycling just to teach this gruff amish kid a lesson? that's cutting off your face to spite your nose.

 

[wolfix]

do you really think that the uci is going to put a massive black mark on the biggest thing in cycling

that's cutting off your face to spite your nose.

Yes ..It's in the best interest of the UCI at this point to hurt the TDF. If you have been following the TDF what was the biggest news?????
** The UCI not informing the TDF about RAZ. Why wouldn't the UCI notify he TDF of a major rider who was expected to wear a jersey [polka] during the TDF?
With the UCI and the ASO just about to split, why wouldn't it be in the best interest of the UCI to see the TDF damaged?

It's not cutting your face off to spite the noses....... it's trying to attempt to control cycling.

McSQuid vs Prudie.
Their rivalry is changing cycling more then any team or rider at this time.
That's what is happening in cycling. The doping is the vehicle in which power is obtained.
FL may be guilty, but as Mr Clean Johnathan Vaughters says ...

[size=-1]

I believe Floyd is innocent. The majority of T/E tests are over-turned at the CAS level. The guy will probably be proven innocent in eight months time, but in the short-term, the media is killing him. Floyd is basically paying for the sins of all the morons who came before him, who have denied, denied, denied. He's going to take the fall for everyone who has cried wolf before him. He's going to be the guy who gets his head cut off and that's a real tragedy.
Johnathan Vaughters

[/size]

 

[tcklyde]

Allowing UCLA to test the B samples might have provided some PR value to the uniformed public, but until we see some noteworthy cases of science professionals at accredited laboratories busted for conspiring to frame athletes and falsify results, there is simply no legitimate reason to object to LNDD testing the B samples. For those inclined to latch onto conspiracy theories, even a second positive result at a different lab would be open to conspiratorial interpretations (e.g., LNDD sent a “spiked” sample to UCLA to cover their falsification of the A sample, the staff at UCLA falsified the results to cover for their colleagues in France, etc.). You’re kidding yourself if you think a variation the testing protocol would “remove the conspiracy aspect” in the minds of people who want to believe such things.



Given the decades-long pattern of widespread doping, cheating and lying among the ranks of professional cyclists, and the utter lack of any such pattern of fraud among science professionals at accredited testing laboratories, any reasonable person will know who is likely to be telling the truth in this case. I don’t think there is a test protocol in the world that would change the mind of anyone willing to buy into such crackpot ideas in the first place.

Bingo. Exactly!

 

[donrhummy]

Wow. I read the appendix and it really is amazing. I'd have to say that I'm convinced Floyd's innocent after reading that - no more on the fence. The first interesting point is that the mislabeling of Floyd's ID number is worse than I'd thought from previous articles. They did not mislabel one document, or get one ID number wrong. They got his ID number wrong THREE times! It almost looks as though they found positive lab tests by other riders and, using wite-out, changed the number to Floyd's. Not saying they did that, but jeez! THREE TIMES.

The contamination of the specimin is a very valid argument. I don't know enough about the science here to know if he's interpreting the numbers properly but if he is, then the sample is contaminated and not a valid sample.

The unreliable testing is to me, 100% a reason for this thing to be thrown out. They tested the same sample (his "A" sample) twice and the two results were off by more than 200%!!! Even in high school science class, if you'd turned in those results, your teacher would tell you you needed to do it again. A 200% variance in tests says that it's not accurate or capable of telling you anything useful with regard to what you were testing for. I don't understand why this case wasn't thrown out.

The other points were ones I was already aware of (e.g. how the rules for what constitutes a positive result is diff. in diff. WADA labs).

His book did not really change my mind; Arnie Baker's presentation DID.

 

[whiteboytrash]

Thanks Floyd...

Wow. I read the appendix and it really is amazing. I'd have to say that I'm convinced Floyd's innocent after reading that - no more on the fence. The first interesting point is that the mislabeling of Floyd's ID number is worse than I'd thought from previous articles. They did not mislabel one document, or get one ID number wrong. They got his ID number wrong THREE times! It almost looks as though they found positive lab tests by other riders and, using wite-out, changed the number to Floyd's. Not saying they did that, but jeez! THREE TIMES.

The contamination of the specimin is a very valid argument. I don't know enough about the science here to know if he's interpreting the numbers properly but if he is, then the sample is contaminated and not a valid sample.

The unreliable testing is to me, 100% a reason for this thing to be thrown out. They tested the same sample (his "A" sample) twice and the two results were off by more than 200%!!! Even in high school science class, if you'd turned in those results, your teacher would tell you you needed to do it again. A 200% variance in tests says that it's not accurate or capable of telling you anything useful with regard to what you were testing for. I don't understand why this case wasn't thrown out.

The other points were ones I was already aware of (e.g. how the rules for what constitutes a positive result is diff. in diff. WADA labs).

His book did not really change my mind; Arnie Baker's presentation DID.

 

[donrhummy]

Thanks Floyd...

Read the book. Then tell us what you think. You don't even have to buy it, go sit in a bookstore or get it from the library.

 

[helmutRoole2]

Wow. I read the appendix and it really is amazing. I'd have to say that I'm convinced Floyd's innocent after reading that - no more on the fence. The first interesting point is that the mislabeling of Floyd's ID number is worse than I'd thought from previous articles. They did not mislabel one document, or get one ID number wrong. They got his ID number wrong THREE times! It almost looks as though they found positive lab tests by other riders and, using wite-out, changed the number to Floyd's. Not saying they did that, but jeez! THREE TIMES.

The contamination of the specimin is a very valid argument. I don't know enough about the science here to know if he's interpreting the numbers properly but if he is, then the sample is contaminated and not a valid sample.

The unreliable testing is to me, 100% a reason for this thing to be thrown out. They tested the same sample (his "A" sample) twice and the two results were off by more than 200%!!! Even in high school science class, if you'd turned in those results, your teacher would tell you you needed to do it again. A 200% variance in tests says that it's not accurate or capable of telling you anything useful with regard to what you were testing for. I don't understand why this case wasn't thrown out.

The other points were ones I was already aware of (e.g. how the rules for what constitutes a positive result is diff. in diff. WADA labs).

His book did not really change my mind; Arnie Baker's presentation DID.

Dude, come on. Consider the source. I'm sure someone can sit down and write an equally compelling book on how Landis is guilty.

Think about it. Do you think Landis would co-author a book that didn't support his innocence? Do you think he's going to include details that undermine his arguments?

 

[poulidor]

Yes, read the book and buy at least 10 to understand why Floyd is innocent, and Donrhummy is right when he said :

They did not mislabel one document, or get one ID number wrong. They got his ID number wrong THREE times! It almost looks as though they found positive lab tests by other riders and, using wite-out, changed the number to Floyd's. Not saying they did that, but jeez! THREE TIMES.

Nothing wrong here.

Who is going to fall in the trap?

 

[Doctor.House]

Yes, read the book and buy at least 10 to understand why Floyd is innocent, and Donrhummy is right when he said :
Nothing wrong here.

Who is going to fall in the trap?

Hide the winnie apologies won;t fly on this board.

Roid Landis is guilty.

 

[Doctor.Tom.M]

A few notes before I get back to telling the world about how Nike and LA are the spawn of the devil (not the stinky German guy!)

1) I think Landis is guilty
2) I think the UCI and the lab messed things up so badly he should be exonerated
3) I think if he is exonerated it may force the UCI/WADA and the labs to clean up their act.
4) I personally have heard many stories told by people I trust in the pro cycling world about the UCI going after people they dislike...at whatever cost.
5) This book has been out for some time and nobody has disputed what he wrote, no lawsuits, no demands to change things. It seems to me that were he lying some of this would have been done.

Nike are baby killers!

 

[donrhummy]

A few notes before I get back to telling the world about how Nike and LA are the spawn of the devil (not the stinky German guy!)

1) I think Landis is guilty
2) I think the UCI and the lab messed things up so badly he should be exonerated
3) I think if he is exonerated it may force the UCI/WADA and the labs to clean up their act.
4) I personally have heard many stories told by people I trust in the pro cycling world about the UCI going after people they dislike...at whatever cost.
5) This book has been out for some time and nobody has disputed what he wrote, no lawsuits, no demands to change things. It seems to me that were he lying some of this would have been done.

Nike are baby killers!

Exactly right. All this stuff is verifiable and there have been no breaking news stories about any of it being proven false, or any denials. Regardless of whether you think floyd doped, the lab/uci messed up so many things (intentionally or inadvertantly) that the case should be dropped.

One other interesting thing: the guy (Paul Scott) who used to be #2 at the UCLA WADA-accredited lab and who used to advise UCI on cases and who started an anti-doping advocacy group, has stated ON THE RECORD that he thinks Floyd is innocent and that if this case had been sent before the UCLA lab, like it usually would be, for advisement, they would have told UCI that they had no case.