LANDIS! Lying?

Derk said:

wilhelm said:

That all depends on how many Dutch and Belgian cyclists died young
about 15 years ago because their hearts stopped in the middle of the
night. Nobody knows the exact figure, since the media can't track all
of the wannabes whose drug experimentation fatally thickened their
blood before they became recognizable names.

All those Dutch cyclists? Who then?

Ever heard of Brugada's syndrome btw?

Derk

Dear Derk,

You're right, it wasn't just Dutch and Belgian athletes who probably
killed themselves misusing EPO--the Swedes may have been dying from
EPO, too:

"Orienteering is a mixture of cross-country running and walking,
popular in Scandinavia. Between 1989 and 1992, seven young Swedish
orienteering enthusiasts died mysteriously. They may well have learned
about the magic potion from cyclists. Between 1987 and 1990, no fewer
than 20 Belgian and Dutch cyclists died from otherwise inexplicable
nocturnal heart attacks. You don't need to be Sherlock, with or
without his syringe, to guess what was going on."
http://www.iht.com/articles/2004/02/21/edwheat_ed3_.php

True, the evidence was circumstantial, but the athletes began dropping
like flies shortly after EPO became available. There's a learning
curve when medical amateurs begin experimenting with dangerous drugs.

Naturally, no autopsies would show EPO as the cause--the drug was new,
there were no tests for it, athletes using it would be concealing
their use of it, and doctors would naturally assume something natural
but unusual like Brugada's syndrome.

Eventually, however, people noticed that an awful lot of young pro
bicyclists started waking up dead after EPO was discovered. That it
was most obvious with the Dutch and Belgian riders was probably a
combination of smaller countries, riders physically closer together,
and possibly a local culture of using too much EPO without realizing
the dangers.

Cheers,

Carl Fogel

"Tim McNamara" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Let's not forget East Germany's Olympic teams- professionals
in all but name, like most Olympic athletes- and Canada's own Ben
Johnson, after all.

Let's not be too judgemental about Ben Johnson. You can't possibly believe
that he was the only one using steroids.

In article <[email hidden]>,

Tom Kunich' cyclintom@yahoo. com said:

"Tim McNamara" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Let's not forget East Germany's Olympic teams- professionals in all
but name, like most Olympic athletes- and Canada's own Ben Johnson,
after all.

Let's not be too judgemental about Ben Johnson. You can't possibly
believe that he was the only one using steroids.

'Course not. But he's Canadian, just like the holier-than-thou Woolsey.
Hence referencing him specifically.

Tim McNamara said:

Yup, lots of pro cyclists are caught cheating. But in large measure
that is due to the fact that pro cycling is one of the sports that looks
the hardest for cheaters.

Good point.

First off, if you do some reading you'll find that the evidence is anything
but overwhelming. The fact that his A and B samples tested the same simply
means that the A sample wasn't independently tampered with and the tests
were excuted in a consistent manner, though that does not mean that the test
couldn't be flawed. This is the result one would expect of such tests. If
there had been a difference between the A and B samples, THAT would have
been unexpected.

Contrary to many reports from lazy news sources, Landis did NOT have a high
level of testosterone in his urine. What he had was a high
testosterone-epitestosterone ratio (a.k.a. T-E ratio). "Normal" ratios are
in the 1:1 - 3:1 range, though studies have found significant numbers of men
with natural T-E ratios in the 6:1 range and some as high as 13:1. The WADA
standard for doping is set at 6:1. The UCI used that limit up until this
year, when it dropped its acceptable ratio to 4:1 (I have no idea why).
Although Landis has been reported to have tested with a ratio of 11:1, there
has been no official confirmation of that yet AFAIK.

Testosterone doping is primarily used to build muscle and works over a long
period of time to do so. However, since cycling is not a sport that benefits
from large, bulky muscles, that type of testosterone use would be
counterproductive for a road cyclist (it might benefit a track sprinter).

There is another use for testoterone; it can be used to enhance short-term
recovery. A testosterone patch is place on the scrotum for up to 6 hours and
it will reduce recovery time, supposedly without boosting levels to the
point of exceeding the legal T/E ratio. As yet, there is no evidence that
Landis did this or even knew about the technique.

Urine tests are woefully innacurate, since they don't measure the level of
testosterone in the blood, they only measure how much was excreted by the
body. The UCI knows of the innacuracy, but insists on using urine tests
anyway, probably because they're cheaper than blood tests. To date, every
athlete that has challenged testosterone urine tests has won their case.
There are reports that there was synthetic testosterone in Landis' urine,
which would certainly be problematic for him. OTOH, his levels were legal
after the stages before and after the stage in question (17), which raises
serious questions about the testing. It seems unlikely that an athlete's T-E
ratio could go from legal levels to 11:1 and back to legal levels in 48
hours.

The lab used by the TDF has serious problems of its own. It has been
compromised by the French press (L'Equipe specifically) and information is
constantly leaked by an internal source. It was reviewed independently after
the most recent recent Lance Armstrong debacle and the report lambasted the
lab for inadequate/improper safeguards and procedures, essentially
discrediting it in the L.A. case. Why the TDF still uses the same lab is
anybody's guess, since one would think they'd want to use a lab that doesn't
have a history of problems.

Right now, there are far more questions than answers in this case.
Specifically:

- What is Floyd's natural T/E ratio?

- What was the actual T-E ratio in the tests?

- How much of a difference was there with the results after the previous and
subsequent stages. It makes a big difference if Floyd was 3.9:1 before and
after (just under the legal limit) and 4.1:1 in the tests (just over the
legal limit) vs. being 1:1 before/after and 11:1 in the tests.

- How much could his (legal) medication and self-medication (drinking after
stage 16) have influenced the test results?

- Were the A and B test results consistent (they were both high, but we
don't know if they were the same).

....and for the conspiracy theorists...

- Why does the UCI/TDF rely on urine tests when they KNOW they're
innacurate.

- Why did the UCI drop it's T-E ratio standard to 4:1 THIS year?

- Is it possible that the urine sample container given to Landis was
"spiked" with testosterone and is there any way to determine if that was the
case?

- Exactly how desperate are the French to have someone other than an
American win their beloved race?

It will be interesting to see how this plays out when the actual test data
is revealed and tests are conducted by another lab (assuming they are).
Landis has already been convicted in the press, by his team and by the
organizers of the TDF, but this case is far from over.

--
you're never too old to have a happy childhood
"wilhelm" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Cyclists are the dirtiest of the dirty
Aug. 6, 2006. 01:00 AM
GARTH WOOLSEY
SPORTS COLUMNIST

Mamas, don't let your sons grow up to be cyclists.

They cheat (well, some of them). And they lie.

Floyd Landis was upset that his mother, Arlene, got dragged into his
Tour de France doping scandal. She's a Mennonite, light years removed
from the heat of the chase and the chill of the laboratory that
yesterday made it official - her son's name will live on in infamy.

Test positive? Then there's only three things to do - deny, deny and
deny.

Test confirmed? Then jack up the defence and lie, lie, lie.

Which is the greater sin? To try to get a competitive edge by using a
banned substance? Or when caught, to lie about it?

It took no time at all for his team to dump Landis following
yesterday's confirmation that wherever that extra testosterone in his
system came from it wasn't from his own, in-house glands.

The Phonak folks said he'd violated their team's code of ethics
(unwritten Rule No. 1: "Whatever the hell you do, don't get caught."😉
The Tour de France unofficially rescinded his title faster than you
can say "abnormally high testosterone to epitestosterone ratio."

Of all athletes, pro cyclists are the most likely to be tested because
it has been established that of all athletes pro cyclists are the
dirtiest of dirty, devious in the extreme. They'd lie to their own
mothers. It's been proven.

Cycling has left a trail of syringe-filled garbage bags, even some
corpses, across the landscape.

Landis and his supporters have claimed he produced the high juice
count naturally. The scientists and most experts say "hooey."

Maybe Landis really believes in his own innocence. Maybe he's not
lying. Maybe.

But you pee in a bottle and face the consequences. He peed, he pays.

Sabotage is always a handy defence. Although, by its very nature, it
is difficult to prove (if it happened at all). Sprinter Justin
Gatlin's coach continues to claim that a massage therapist with a
grudge somehow rubbed a testosterone-laced cream into his athlete's
legs just before a doping test. That's his story and he's sticking to
it. (Deny, remember? Deny, deny.)

It's almost - not quite, though - refreshing to hear one of this
conspiratorial crew come clean, as did the Norwegian sprinter Aham
Okeke when he was caught using for the third time; he may be banned
for life. He's 36, so the end was nigh anyway. Now that he's been
caught, he admits he went to a doctor for testosterone after he
injured his thigh in June. "It was a desperate attempt," Okeke says.
"I thought I would miss the European Championships after being
injured. I can only blame myself. I'm sorry for all my teammates, my
family and my friends."

But especially sorry for himself, no doubt.

In the U.S., the Landis debacle will be seen in some quarters as more
of the Euro-centric crusade to discredit American cyclists. Couldn't
get Lance Armstrong, so got his protégé, etc. But the problems,
clearly, run deep and cross all borders. Cyclists have for decades
been at the cutting edge of cheating and ridding their culture of the
anything-goes attitude won't be easy.

The cycling authorities sound a lot like their counterparts in
baseball. For years, they've reaped the dividends that come with
phenomenal performances, treating rumours of wrong-doing with a wink
here and a nod there and denials all-around.

We live in a drug-saturated society, from every-day painkillers to
concoctions that perform miracles. All these years later Ben Johnson
is a Cheetah.

In war and commerce just about anything goes. In sports, though, there
remains this central, Ned Flander-esque idea that competition should
be about fairness and level playing fields, rulebooks that matter.

Call the notion naïve if you like, old-fashioned, but its worth
hanging on to.

The survey says ... Floyd is a fink. No word of a lie.

In article <[email hidden]>,

dan said:

First off, if you do some reading you'll find that the evidence is
anything but overwhelming. The fact that his A and B samples tested
the same simply means that the A sample wasn't independently tampered
with and the tests were excuted in a consistent manner, though that
does not mean that the test couldn't be flawed. This is the result
one would expect of such tests. If there had been a difference
between the A and B samples, THAT would have been unexpected.

Actually, if the test is flawed one would expect to see variation in the
test results, not consistency. A flawed test has a higher error of
measurement, and thus has lower reliability and validity.

Quoted message said:

Contrary to many reports from lazy news sources, Landis did NOT have
a high level of testosterone in his urine. What he had was a high
testosterone-epitestosterone ratio (a.k.a. T-E ratio). "Normal"
ratios are in the 1:1 - 3:1 range, though studies have found
significant numbers of men with natural T-E ratios in the 6:1 range
and some as high as 13:1. The WADA standard for doping is set at 6:1.

Read WADA's own document on the subject, their standard is 4:1 and has
been for quite some time.

Quoted message said:

The UCI used that limit up until this year, when it dropped its
acceptable ratio to 4:1 (I have no idea why). Although Landis has
been reported to have tested with a ratio of 11:1, there has been no
official confirmation of that yet AFAIK.

Testosterone doping is primarily used to build muscle and works over
a long period of time to do so. However, since cycling is not a sport
that benefits from large, bulky muscles, that type of testosterone
use would be counterproductive for a road cyclist (it might benefit a
track sprinter).

There is another use for testoterone; it can be used to enhance
short-term recovery. A testosterone patch is place on the scrotum for
up to 6 hours and it will reduce recovery time, supposedly without
boosting levels to the point of exceeding the legal T/E ratio. As
yet, there is no evidence that Landis did this or even knew about the
technique.

Since this is not a new discovery, it is reasonable to expect that the
team doctor is aware of this and knows how to use it.

Quoted message said:

Urine tests are woefully innacurate, since they don't measure the
level of testosterone in the blood, they only measure how much was
excreted by the body. The UCI knows of the innacuracy, but insists on
using urine tests anyway, probably because they're cheaper than blood
tests. To date, every athlete that has challenged testosterone urine
tests has won their case. There are reports that there was synthetic
testosterone in Landis' urine, which would certainly be problematic
for him.

Written like someone coaching Floyd's defense team. Urine tests are
fine since clearance rates through urinary excretion are consistent
except in the presence of a pathological condition. Doing venipuncture
carries health risks and shouldn't be done unless there is no other way
to obtain the necessary information (e.g., hematocrit), so urine tests
are used for as many things as is reasonable.

Quoted message said:

OTOH, his levels were legal after the stages before and
after the stage in question (17), which raises serious questions
about the testing. It seems unlikely that an athlete's T-E ratio
could go from legal levels to 11:1 and back to legal levels in 48
hours.

Actually, that's entirely reasonable. The half life of testosterone is
short and it is mostly excreted within six hours, according to the
information I was able to find.

Quoted message said:

The lab used by the TDF has serious problems of its own. It has been
compromised by the French press (L'Equipe specifically) and
information is constantly leaked by an internal source. It was
reviewed independently after the most recent recent Lance Armstrong
debacle and the report lambasted the lab for inadequate/improper
safeguards and procedures, essentially discrediting it in the L.A.
case. Why the TDF still uses the same lab is anybody's guess, since
one would think they'd want to use a lab that doesn't have a history
of problems.

Right now, there are far more questions than answers in this case.

Only questions from the perspective of the public, since the answers to
many of the questions you pose are known- just not released.

Quoted message said:

Specifically:

- What is Floyd's natural T/E ratio?

- What was the actual T-E ratio in the tests?

- How much of a difference was there with the results after the
previous and subsequent stages. It makes a big difference if Floyd
was 3.9:1 before and after (just under the legal limit) and 4.1:1 in
the tests (just over the legal limit) vs. being 1:1 before/after and
11:1 in the tests.

- How much could his (legal) medication and self-medication (drinking
after stage 16) have influenced the test results?

Not at all. Indeed, if anything the excessive fluid use was an attempt
to keep his urine dilute and thus to keep the testosterone level in the
sample as low as possible.

Quoted message said:

- Were the A and B test results consistent (they were both high, but
we don't know if they were the same).

...and for the conspiracy theorists...

- Why does the UCI/TDF rely on urine tests when they KNOW they're
innacurate.

Because they are not inaccurate as you claim. Stop spreading the FUD
defense.

Quoted message said:

- Why did the UCI drop it's T-E ratio standard to 4:1 THIS year?

Probably to be consistent with the WADA standard, which has been 4:1 for
quite some time. Not that the decrease is relevant to the case, as only
a small fraction of people have T:E ratios above 4:1.

Quoted message said:

- Is it possible that the urine sample container given to Landis was
"spiked" with testosterone and is there any way to determine if that
was the case?

Yeah, if his ratio was about 7000:1. In order to plausibly spike the
sample, the spiker would need to have known Floyd's normal ratios, the
level of concentration of his urine, the volume of urine that would be
in the sample jar, etc. This is just grasping at straws- just like
floyd is doing.

Quoted message said:

- Exactly how desperate are the French to have someone other than an
American win their beloved race?

Finally you get down to it. The American can't be guilty, it must be
the damned French. But they'd have had to spike the samples of a few
riders to get a French winner, eh?

Quoted message said:

It will be interesting to see how this plays out when the actual test
data is revealed and tests are conducted by another lab (assuming
they are). Landis has already been convicted in the press, by his
team and by the organizers of the TDF, but this case is far from
over.

[censored]. The legal dance isn't over, but Floyd's career probably is.
The reported presence of synthetic testosterone in his sample is the
last nail in the coffin. The fat lady is warming up in the green room.

Quoted message said:

Between 1987 and 1990, no fewer than 20 Belgian and Dutch cyclists died
from otherwise inexplicable nocturnal heart attacks.

Please read this:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=10816802&dopt=Abstract

Cyclism isn't the only sport affected by this btw. A french wine farmer,
whom I have known for a very long time, told me a long time ago he had
clients in the Formula 1 scene. He said that he was told that some(?) of
these drivers take pills that cause them to see less danger. And then there
are soccer players, and the list is longer. It cerainly isn't limited to
either cyclism or European riders. But anyway: how obvious it may seem:
it's very possible that the athletes you mention died from Brugada's, which
wasn't discovered until recently.

Gr, Derk

Derk said:

wilhelm said:

That all depends on how many Dutch and Belgian cyclists died young
about 15 years ago because their hearts stopped in the middle of the
night. Nobody knows the exact figure, since the media can't track all
of the wannabes whose drug experimentation fatally thickened their
blood before they became recognizable names.

All those Dutch cyclists? Who then?

Ever heard of Brugada's syndrome btw?

Derk

Oosterbosch
Draaijer

There were a few Belgian and Dutch heart related deaths, anyones guess
about the cause. I do remember thataround the time Draaijer and
Oosterbosch had their heart failures there was already mention in the
papers about more deaths (2-3?) in the amateur peloton. One of the
causes wich was looked into was the common flue, wich can indeed damge
the heart muscle. Considering that they all went around the same period
and the added testimonies that Oosterbosch was a heavy user itsn't
farfetched that Doping played it's part. Also realize that we are
talking about PDM/Panasonic, wich had their own doping cases
(Intralipid, Theunissen) and the coming out of Winnen and Rooks.

It's easy to point fingers, but I remember that back then it struck me
as odd.

Tuschinski said:

It's easy to point fingers, but I remember that back then it struck me
as odd.

True. Another example: last week I got a call from a friend in France, whose
brother dropped dead from his bike. This guy was a healthy person, who
didn't smoke, didn't drink and I'm 99.99999% certain he didn't take any
doping either. When people drove by, some must have thought: "you see,
another doping victim". I'm sure there have been a lot of those cases and
there are still some, but it's not very nice when you're clean and get
accused and you can't defend yourself any more.

Gr, Derk

Derk said:

Quoted message said:

Between 1987 and 1990, no fewer than 20 Belgian and Dutch cyclists died
from otherwise inexplicable nocturnal heart attacks.

Please read this:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=10816802&dopt=Abstract

Cyclism isn't the only sport affected by this btw. A french wine farmer,
whom I have known for a very long time, told me a long time ago he had
clients in the Formula 1 scene. He said that he was told that some(?) of
these drivers take pills that cause them to see less danger. And then there
are soccer players, and the list is longer. It cerainly isn't limited to
either cyclism or European riders. But anyway: how obvious it may seem:
it's very possible that the athletes you mention died from Brugada's, which
wasn't discovered until recently.

Gr, Derk

Dear Derk,

Yes, that article says that Brugada's syndrome exists.

It doesn't say that it was absent, then suddenly appeared in numerous
Dutch and Belgian pro cyclists soon after the discovery of EPO, and
then went away. The use of EPO by pro riders was widespread and
eventually acknowledged.

To make a plausible case that the Dutch and Belgian riders died of
Brugada's syndrome, you'd either have to show that it ran in their
families (that evidence would still be available) or show that on
average that many young Dutch and Belgian riders die in their sleep of
heart attacks, year after year.

As far as I know, they don't. And the ones that do are far more likely
to be doping than inheriting a rare genetic syndrome. Brugada finds
only 1 patient per 1,000 at risk for the disease:

"Recent data from France and Japan show a prevalence of 1 per 1000
electrocardiograms compatible with the syndrome in the normal adult
population. . . ."

In the countries of interest, the rate may be as low as 1 per 30,000:

"In the Dutch area of Belgium (6 million inhabitants) already 44
families with the syndrome have been identified. About 15% of members
are affected. That gives an incidence of 1:30.000 in that area."

http://www.brugada.org/about/disease-incidents.html

The incidence of doping in pro bicycling in the 2006 Tour de France is
thought to be at least 1 per 139, and much higher in previous and less
heavily tested events. In fact, a number of contenders did not start
the 2006 Tdf, due to doping allegations.

(As for Formula One drivers, they may or may not take pills "to see
less danger," but I know of no reports that they're dying of heart
attacks, much less that the pills cause such deaths.)

Cheers,

Carl Fogel

Derk said:

Cyclism isn't the only sport affected by this btw. A french wine farmer,
whom I have known for a very long time, told me a long time ago he had
clients in the Formula 1 scene. He said that he was told that some(?) of
these drivers take pills that cause them to see less danger.

Why not just use *really* dark glasses? They'd pass doping controls as
well.

Mark J.

Tim McNamara said:

In article <[email hidden]>,
"dan" <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

OTOH, his levels were legal after the stages before and
after the stage in question (17), which raises serious questions
about the testing. It seems unlikely that an athlete's T-E ratio
could go from legal levels to 11:1 and back to legal levels in 48
hours.

Quoted message said:

Actually, that's entirely reasonable. The half life of testosterone is
short and it is mostly excreted within six hours, according to the
information I was able to find.

Assuming you're right about the half life (I don't have the first clue
if that's reasonable), and assuming that Floyd was taking on
testosterone, then one of two things would have to be true to
get an 11:1 ratio:

a) He was doped *to the gills* prior to the race. If the
epitestosterone level stayed constant, the T:E ratio would have been
22:1 six hours earlier, which was early in the stage. Since his T levels
were reported to be "normal" at the time of the test, he would have had

Quoted message said:

2x normal levels prior to the race.

or

b) He was getting testosterone during the race.

Any other possibilities I'm overlooking?

--
Dave
dvt at psu dot edu

Everyone confesses that exertion which brings out all the powers of body
and mind is the best thing for us; but most people do all they can to
get rid of it, and as a general rule nobody does much more than
circumstances drive them to do. -Harriet Beecher Stowe, abolitionist and
novelist (1811-1896)

In article <[email hidden]>, dvt <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

Tim McNamara said:

In article <[email hidden]>,
"dan" <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

OTOH, his levels were legal after the stages before and after the
stage in question (17), which raises serious questions about the
testing. It seems unlikely that an athlete's T-E ratio could go
from legal levels to 11:1 and back to legal levels in 48 hours.

Quoted message said:

Actually, that's entirely reasonable. The half life of
testosterone is short and it is mostly excreted within six hours,
according to the information I was able to find.

Assuming you're right about the half life (I don't have the first
clue if that's reasonable), and assuming that Floyd was taking on
testosterone, then one of two things would have to be true to get an
11:1 ratio:

From the FDA regarding the Androgen testosterone patch:

http://www.fda.gov/medWatch/SAFETY/2006/May_PIs/Androderm_PI.pdf

"Upon removal of the Androderm systems, serum testosterone
concentrations decrease with an apparent half-life of approximately 70
minutes. Hypogonadal concentrations are reached within 24 hours
following system removal."

Now this is, like all such clinical studies, a set of non-normal
subjects. That may affect the excretion half-life of the drug. Note
also that other types of testosterone administration apparently result
in half-lives from 1-12 days (e.g., depot injections).

Quoted message said:

a) He was doped *to the gills* prior to the race. If the
epitestosterone level stayed constant, the T:E ratio would have been
22:1 six hours earlier, which was early in the stage. Since his T
levels were reported to be "normal" at the time of the test, he would
have had > 2x normal levels prior to the race.

or

b) He was getting testosterone during the race.

I'm guessing that a) is the answer. The purpose was to help him recover
so that he could attack on Stage 17 (or perhaps even just recover well
enough to carry on, and attacking was a bonus), and that they screwed up
the math or Floyd's clearance rate is lower than expected.

Of course, this is all blind conjecture. Floyd could be innocent
somehow.

Mark said:

Why not just use *really* dark glasses? They'd pass doping controls as
well.

I'll rephrase it: "according to this guy, substances are taken in order to
take more risks than they normally would".

Derk

Derk said:

Mark said:

Why not just use *really* dark glasses? They'd pass doping controls as
well.

I'll rephrase it: "according to this guy, substances are taken in order to
take more risks than they normally would".

I'd expect a vinter to be very familiar with the concept, being part of a long
tradition of supplying liquid courage.

Ron

Quoted message said:

Jasper-but this is true of 94.3 percent of all tour riders. then
there's the runner who runs out of deathvalley to the top of uhuhuh.
reading rodale's Road rider book? of the rider who mastered training
for the continental race? the wild concept here is take a look at the
slobs in walmart! but are you gonna run out of death valley to uhuhuh?
keep this in mind at all times
NEVER BUY A HORSE FROM A MENNONITE

Man, that's surreal at the end there.

Jasper

Jasper Janssen said:

Quoted message said:

Jasper-but this is true of 94.3 percent of all tour riders. then
there's the runner who runs out of deathvalley to the top of uhuhuh.
reading rodale's Road rider book? of the rider who mastered training
for the continental race? the wild concept here is take a look at the
slobs in walmart! but are you gonna run out of death valley to uhuhuh?
keep this in mind at all times
NEVER BUY A HORSE FROM A MENNONITE

Man, that's surreal at the end there.

The Gulf Coast Oracle is always surreal.

Ron

On Thu, 17 Aug 2006 11:37:45 -0400, RonSonic <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

Jasper Janssen said:

Quoted message said:

Jasper-but this is true of 94.3 percent of all tour riders. then
there's the runner who runs out of deathvalley to the top of uhuhuh.
reading rodale's Road rider book? of the rider who mastered training
for the continental race? the wild concept here is take a look at the
slobs in walmart! but are you gonna run out of death valley to uhuhuh?
keep this in mind at all times
NEVER BUY A HORSE FROM A MENNONITE

Man, that's surreal at the end there.

The Gulf Coast Oracle is always surreal.

True, but this one is really exceptional.

Jasper