Landis' defence

dkahn400 said:

Simon Brooke said:

It seems to me that the cyclists whose reputations have been traduced have
a real complaint against the UCI, one which I would expect Landis, at
least, to turn into legal action.

Apart from his loss of earnings and the damage to his reputation so far
Landis faces the problem that his name being cleared, which now seems a
certainty, is likely to be perceived by the average person as some kind
of lucky escape. It therefore seems to me that legal action from him is
almost inevitable as the only way he can really establish his innocence
in the minds of the public.

Especially as if the USADA clear him then they will perhaps be seen as
weak or 'protecting one of the boys'.

What a mess.. The only people to come out of this with any credit are..

... answers on the back of a postage stamp please.

...d

dkahn400 said:

his name being cleared, which now seems a certainty

Hah!

--
E. Dronkert

in message <[email hidden]>, Dan Gregory

(') said:

Simon Brooke said:

Also today, charges against Ivan Basso have finally been dropped for
lack of evidence. The Italian Olympic Committee say they may reopen the
case if new evidence comes to light, and the UCI may appeal the case to
the Court of Arbitration in Sport, but Ivan expects to race on Saturday.

He's still not on the start list for Lombardy...

No, and apparently Bjarne says he won't be.

I'm really disappointed. I appreciate there are lots of possible reasons,
but I will be really sad if Ivan leaves CSC.

--
[email hidden] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

;; may contain traces of nuts, bolts or washers.

in message <[email hidden]>, Simon Bennett

(') said:

Dan Gregory said:

He's still not on the start list for Lombardy...

He's still under investigation in Spain. That would exclude him from
competition, wouldn't it?

The Spanish courts have said that he's not, and that the Operacion Puerto
evidence is inadmissible anyway in any case against cyclists.

This whole house of cards is falling apart.

--
[email hidden] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

...but have you *seen* the size of the world wide spider?

----- Original Message -----
From: "Simon Brooke" <[email hidden]>
Newsgroups: rec.bicycles.racing,uk.rec.cycling
Sent: Friday, October 13, 2006 11:23 AM
Subject: Re: Landis' defence

Quoted message said:

Personally, I shall be bouncing up and down on the sofa on Saturday
afternoon, yelling 'Basso! Basso! Basso!' with the best of them.

Knock yourself out, but he's not starting. Riis seems reluctant to offer him
a platform now that they appear to be parting ways.

Alexander

In article <[email hidden]>
David Martin <[email hidden]> wrote:
<snip>

Quoted message said:

What a mess.. The only people to come out of this with any credit are..

The podium girls?

Simon Brooke said:

I have a nasty suspicion that what this really boils down to is a turf-war
between the UCI/ProTour and the owners of the three big Grand Tours, at
the expense of the cyclists. The UCI was happy to pre-emptively leak and
talk up the evidence - as it turns out, wholly inconclusive - against the
winners and major stars of the Giro and the Tour de France and it seems to
me the motivation may have been to damage the pre-eminence of the Grand
Tours, and to increase the influence of the UCI.

At last something that makes sense!
Although having seen Landis close up on that day I am convinced he was
on a charge!

Rob Morley said:

In article <[email hidden]>
David Martin <[email hidden]> wrote:
<snip>

Quoted message said:

What a mess.. The only people to come out of this with any credit are..

The podium girls?

Probably more doped than the riders.

Ron

Sirius631 said:

Simon Bennett said:

Dan Gregory said:

He's still not on the start list for Lombardy...

He's still under investigation in Spain. That would exclude him from
competition, wouldn't it?

As much as I want drug cheats out of cycling, the Spanish investigation
has become nothing but trial by innuendo. It will be a long time before
the investigation comes to any actionable conclusions, in the meantime
anyone who has been implicated, has had their careers disrupted.

Quoted message said:

Remember that nobody has been found guilty as yet, in fact all those

NOBODY expects the Spanish In...er, well, you know. ;-p

Quoted message said:

riders from the Astana team have been exonerated, and yet their whole
team could not take part in the Tour de France because of Operation
Puerto.

David Lloyd
The pub is responsible for my opinions.

Dan Gregory said:

Simon Brooke said:

I have a nasty suspicion that what this really boils down to is a turf-war
between the UCI/ProTour and the owners of the three big Grand Tours, at
the expense of the cyclists. The UCI was happy to pre-emptively leak and
talk up the evidence - as it turns out, wholly inconclusive - against the
winners and major stars of the Giro and the Tour de France and it seems to
me the motivation may have been to damage the pre-eminence of the Grand
Tours, and to increase the influence of the UCI.

At last something that makes sense!
Although having seen Landis close up on that day I am convinced he was
on a charge!

Almost every bike race I have ever been a part of has had the final placings
decided by a gut check of some sort. It's probably more a factor among the
barely competent mountain bikers and cross racers that I ride among, but it
applies at every level. It ain't just dope. It ain't just guy's at the pro tour
level either.

But, when it is a rider of that class and caliber it is truly awesome to see.

Floyd won and deserved it.

Ron

Dan Gregory said:

Although having seen Landis close up on that day I am convinced he was
on a charge!

He was, but it's not now possible to know conclusively whether the
source of that charge was chemical or psychological. His ride that day
was either one of the great solo efforts of cycling history, somewhat
aided by confusion in the rival teams, or it was simple cheating.
Personally I'm now happy to give Landis the benefit of the doubt, but
thanks to the machinations of the French so-called laboratory we'll
never really know. If he was cheating there is certainly no meaningful
evidence of it as far as we now know.

In future I think A and B samples should be processed in separate
laboratories, preferably on separate continents.

--
Dave...

dkahn400 said:

Dan Gregory wrote:

snip

Quoted message said:

In future I think A and B samples should be processed in separate
laboratories, preferably on separate continents.

--
Dave...

I have wondered why this isn't part of the protocol already.

tgh.

Quoted message said:

Sirius631 said:

As much as I want drug cheats out of cycling, the Spanish investigation
has become nothing but trial by innuendo. It will be a long time before
the investigation comes to any actionable conclusions, in the meantime
anyone who has been implicated, has had their careers disrupted.

NOBODY expects the Spanish In...er, well, you know. ;-p

Let's finish that one-

NOBODY expects the Spanish Inquisition to come to a conclusion any time
soon, without having dragged many innocent riders' name through the
mud, whilst leaving the footballers, atheletes and tennis stars alone.

In article
<[email hidden]>
,
"David Martin" <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

dkahn400 said:

Simon Brooke said:

It seems to me that the cyclists whose reputations have been traduced have
a real complaint against the UCI, one which I would expect Landis, at
least, to turn into legal action.

Apart from his loss of earnings and the damage to his reputation so far
Landis faces the problem that his name being cleared, which now seems a
certainty, is likely to be perceived by the average person as some kind
of lucky escape. It therefore seems to me that legal action from him is
almost inevitable as the only way he can really establish his innocence
in the minds of the public.

Especially as if the USADA clear him then they will perhaps be seen as
weak or 'protecting one of the boys'.

What a mess.. The only people to come out of this with any credit are..

.. answers on the back of a postage stamp please.

I.

Hang on

I am noe led to understand that what every top class professional athlete
does at the end of a knackering day when they have really ridden badly is
have a few beers and Jack Daniels as Landis said he did and as a result
accidently increase his testosterone level.

Now I have done a few long rides, got rather knackered as well, but I have
never felt that a few beers and whiskies were the right medicine to enable
me to perform well the following day.

I'm afraid that in my mind Flawed Landis was convicted by the words which
came from his own mouth. I think he is guilty.

Best regards

Rod King

"Tony Raven" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

A presentation of Floyd Landis' main defence arguments is now on the web
and I have to say, having read it it looks like c**k up and mistakes end
to end in the testing process. Whether he did or not there are so many
mistakes identified that its impossible to say anything for certain
other than the testing lab and some others should be fired.

http://ia331328.us.archive.org/1/items/Floyd_Landis_2006_Case_Documents5/Lan
dis_Baker_Slides.pdf

Quoted message said:

http://trustbut.blogspot.com/2006/10/its-here.html

--
Tony

"Anyone who conducts an argument by appealing to authority is not using
his intelligence; he is just using his memory."
- Leonardo da Vinci

Rod King wrote on 13/10/2006 21:55 +0100:

Quoted message said:

Hang on

I am noe led to understand that what every top class professional athlete
does at the end of a knackering day when they have really ridden badly is
have a few beers and Jack Daniels as Landis said he did and as a result
accidently increase his testosterone level.

Perhaps starting from some facts would help. Landis' testosterone level
was not elevated. It was perfectly normal according to the published
lab results, although virtually all the press have got this one wrong.
It was his epitestosterone that was unusually low. Perhaps the doctors
have invented an inverse syringe that sucks epitestosterone out of the body

In addition the published lab reports show that the samples failed the
degredation/contamination checks and under the WADA protocols should
have been discarded and not tested

Finally his athelete identification number is different from the numbers
on the schedule of samples transported to the lab that day which is
different again from the number on the test result sheets. The only
test sheet with the correct number on had the originally number Tippexed
out and Landis' number written over the top. This is contrary to WADA
protocols and contrary to basic lab book good practice.

Do you still think that is evidence of guilt?

--
Tony

"Anyone who conducts an argument by appealing to authority is not using
his intelligence; he is just using his memory."
- Leonardo da Vinci

Tony Raven said:

Perhaps starting from some facts would help. Landis' testosterone level
was not elevated. It was perfectly normal according to the published
lab results, although virtually all the press have got this one wrong.
It was his epitestosterone that was unusually low. Perhaps the doctors
have invented an inverse syringe that sucks epitestosterone out of the body

But low epitestosterone is a signature of artificially boosted testosterone.

Quoted message said:

Finally his athelete identification number is different from the numbers
on the schedule of samples transported to the lab that day which is
different again from the number on the test result sheets. The only
test sheet with the correct number on had the originally number Tippexed
out and Landis' number written over the top. This is contrary to WADA
protocols and contrary to basic lab book good practice.

He can't have it both ways, at one point he states the paperwork doesn't
tie the sample to him, and then later he claims that the medical
history statements would identify him to anyone wanting to fix the test.
I don't think anyone is seriously doubting it is his sample, just
looking for a failure in protocol.

Which leaves:

Quoted message said:

In addition the published lab reports show that the samples failed

the > degradation/contamination checks and under the WADA protocols
should > have been discarded and not tested

Quoted message said:

I'm no chemist, so I'm not going to speculate whether this is a
technical infringement that would have no bearing, or a serious
contamination issue.

Personally, I think he's guilty, I think Joe Public think he's guilty,
and I think the rest of the peleton think he's guilty - most of whom are
just thinking "there but for the grace of god..."

Tony

I accept what you are saying. Its just that Landis claimed that at the end
of his ride he had several beers and a few Jack Daniels and that was the
cause of his testosterone inbalance.

Well what is not credible is the fact that a highly trained and professional
athlete would take alcohol to that level in the middle of a competeition.
Certainly any such action is not going to do his body any good whatsoever
and is not a recipe for success the folowing day. If a few beers and Jack
Daniels were the only stimulant he took then certainly brewery shares should
have climbed better the following day than even Landis did.

I am afraid on a very subjective level I believe him guilty.

Best regards

Rod

"Tony Raven" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Rod King wrote on 13/10/2006 21:55 +0100:

Quoted message said:

Hang on

I am noe led to understand that what every top class professional

athlete

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

does at the end of a knackering day when they have really ridden badly

is

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

have a few beers and Jack Daniels as Landis said he did and as a result
accidently increase his testosterone level.

Perhaps starting from some facts would help. Landis' testosterone level
was not elevated. It was perfectly normal according to the published
lab results, although virtually all the press have got this one wrong.
It was his epitestosterone that was unusually low. Perhaps the doctors
have invented an inverse syringe that sucks epitestosterone out of the

body

Quoted message said:

In addition the published lab reports show that the samples failed the
degredation/contamination checks and under the WADA protocols should
have been discarded and not tested

Finally his athelete identification number is different from the numbers
on the schedule of samples transported to the lab that day which is
different again from the number on the test result sheets. The only
test sheet with the correct number on had the originally number Tippexed
out and Landis' number written over the top. This is contrary to WADA
protocols and contrary to basic lab book good practice.

Do you still think that is evidence of guilt?

--
Tony

"Anyone who conducts an argument by appealing to authority is not using
his intelligence; he is just using his memory."
- Leonardo da Vinci

Ib wrote on 13/10/2006 22:47 +0100:

Quoted message said:

But low epitestosterone is a signature of artificially boosted
testosterone.

Artificially boosted to normal levels?

Quoted message said:

He can't have it both ways, at one point he states the paperwork doesn't
tie the sample to him, and then later he claims that the medical
history statements would identify him to anyone wanting to fix the test.
I don't think anyone is seriously doubting it is his sample, just
looking for a failure in protocol.

The medication form is a different form from the test result sheets so
the number can be right on one and wrong on the other. Unfortunately
the quality of the medication sheet is so poor I can't make out the
numbers to tell what number it says, but certainly you can't say he is
having it both ways on the evidence

Quoted message said:

Which leaves:

Quoted message said:

In addition the published lab reports show that the samples failed

the > degradation/contamination checks and under the WADA protocols
should > have been discarded and not tested

Quoted message said:

I'm no chemist, so I'm not going to speculate whether this is a
technical infringement that would have no bearing, or a serious
contamination issue.

It doesn't matter. Those are the rules WADA have set for testing and
discarding samples for contamination and/or degradation. You cannot
change the rules for one competitor after the event. If their own rules
say they should be discarded they should follow their own rules.

It is clear you are no chemist. Anyone with the rudiments of Good
Laboratory Practice would know that there are plenty enough errors and
failures to follow procedure to make the results meaningless.

--
Tony

"Anyone who conducts an argument by appealing to authority is not using
his intelligence; he is just using his memory."
- Leonardo da Vinci

in message <[email hidden]>, Rod King

(') said:

Hang on

I am noe led to understand that what every top class professional athlete
does at the end of a knackering day when they have really ridden badly is
have a few beers and Jack Daniels as Landis said he did and as a result
accidently increase his testosterone level.

Except we now know there's no credible evidence that his testosterone level
did increase. The sample in which the testosterone level was thought to
have increased had its identifying number confused not once but twice, so
no-one really knows whose sample it was; and the data on which the
supposed increase is based seems inconsistent with anything but a
misadministered test.

You wouldn't hang a dog on this evidence.

Quoted message said:

I'm afraid that in my mind Flawed Landis was convicted by the words which
came from his own mouth. I think he is guilty.

Well, that was my view as recently as six weeks ago:
http://www.jasmine.org.uk/dogfood/story/article_52.html

But on what I've seen since I've changed my mind. I don't know that he was
innocent, but I do know that the UCI are more interested in the conviction
than the truth.

--
[email hidden] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

;; my other religion is Emacs