Liggett's take on it

Scott said:

Bob Roll and Phil Liggett are in Denver today, appearing later at
Wheat Ridge Cyclery. On a local news show this morning, they were
interviewed briefly, and during that interview Phil was asked
specifically what he thought about the Landis affair.

His response was interesting. In essence he said, 'from what I know
NOW, Landis WILL be found innocent of the charges and I do not believe
WADA will appeal the decision' (his emphasis, not mine). He went on
to say that he bumped into him in a hotel in California last week and
they talked for about an hour. His conclusion "He did not cheat."

I'm guessing Phil must be in on certain info that perhaps we're not
yet privvy to.

yep, an hour in front of Landis.

On Feb 27, 10:40 am, "Qui si parla Campagnolo" <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

Scott said:

Bob Roll and Phil Liggett are in Denver today, appearing later at
Wheat Ridge Cyclery. On a local news show this morning, they were
interviewed briefly, and during that interview Phil was asked
specifically what he thought about the Landis affair.

Quoted message said:

His response was interesting. In essence he said, 'from what I know
NOW, Landis WILL be found innocent of the charges and I do not believe
WADA will appeal the decision' (his emphasis, not mine). He went on
to say that he bumped into him in a hotel in California last week and
they talked for about an hour. His conclusion "He did not cheat."

Quoted message said:

I'm guessing Phil must be in on certain info that perhaps we're not
yet privvy to.

yep, an hour in front of Landis.

You sound skeptical, Peter.

Quoted message said:

Bob Roll and Phil Liggett are in Denver today, appearing later at
Wheat Ridge Cyclery. On a local news show this morning, they were
interviewed briefly, and during that interview Phil was asked
specifically what he thought about the Landis affair.

His response was interesting. In essence he said, 'from what I know
NOW, Landis WILL be found innocent of the charges and I do not believe
WADA will appeal the decision' (his emphasis, not mine). He went on
to say that he bumped into him in a hotel in California last week and
they talked for about an hour. His conclusion "He did not cheat."

I'm guessing Phil must be in on certain info that perhaps we're not
yet privvy to.

Phil has the advantage of having spent an hour with Landis, plus a good deal
of insight into the people who run things (be it WADA, USADA, UCI, ASO etc).
And he, like the rest of us, is probably getting a sense that, over the last
couple of weeks, the tide had changed dramatically. It probably started with
[censored] Pound's ridiculous comment about Landis violating every virgin within
100 miles because of the amount of testosterone he supposedly had. At that
point things jumped from the merely scientific finding of fact to such an
obvious vendetta that reasonable people could no longer ignore it.

--Mike--
Chain Reaction Bicycles
www.ChainReaction.com

Scott said:

On Feb 27, 10:40 am, "Qui si parla Campagnolo" <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

On Feb 27, 10:24 am, "Scott" <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Bob Roll and Phil Liggett are in Denver today, appearing later at
Wheat Ridge Cyclery. On a local news show this morning, they were
interviewed briefly, and during that interview Phil was asked
specifically what he thought about the Landis affair.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

His response was interesting. In essence he said, 'from what I know
NOW, Landis WILL be found innocent of the charges and I do not believe
WADA will appeal the decision' (his emphasis, not mine). He went on
to say that he bumped into him in a hotel in California last week and
they talked for about an hour. His conclusion "He did not cheat."

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I'm guessing Phil must be in on certain info that perhaps we're not
yet privvy to.

Quoted message said:

yep, an hour in front of Landis.

You sound skeptical, Peter.

WEll, even if he is found guilty or innocent, nobody but one will know
the real truth. We will see the 'results', and he may be exonerated or
sanctioned, but none of us will really know.

Qui si parla Campagnolo said:

WEll, even if he is found guilty or innocent, nobody but one will know
the real truth. We will see the 'results', and he may be exonerated or
sanctioned, but none of us will really know.

Anyone who thinks he "knows" about any rider is lying to himself, or is totally
ignorant about the history of sport. Performance is probably as good of an
indicator as a test with proven flaws.

Dan

"Qui si parla Campagnolo" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Scott said:

On Feb 27, 10:40 am, "Qui si parla Campagnolo" <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

On Feb 27, 10:24 am, "Scott" <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted message said:

> Bob Roll and Phil Liggett are in Denver today, appearing later at
> Wheat Ridge Cyclery. On a local news show this morning, they
> were
> interviewed briefly, and during that interview Phil was asked
> specifically what he thought about the Landis affair.

Quoted message said:

> His response was interesting. In essence he said, 'from what I
> know
> NOW, Landis WILL be found innocent of the charges and I do not
> believe
> WADA will appeal the decision' (his emphasis, not mine). He went
> on
> to say that he bumped into him in a hotel in California last week
> and
> they talked for about an hour. His conclusion "He did not
> cheat."

Quoted message said:

> I'm guessing Phil must be in on certain info that perhaps we're
> not
> yet privvy to.

Quoted message said:

yep, an hour in front of Landis.

You sound skeptical, Peter.

WEll, even if he is found guilty or innocent, nobody but one will know
the real truth. We will see the 'results', and he may be exonerated or
sanctioned, but none of us will really know.

There is a great deal, cycling related and otherwise, about which none
of us will really know. This incident got a lot of publicity but I
don't see how we will ever really know, e.g., whether some/most/none/all
cyclists use performance enhancing drugs, or for that matter, whether or
not the same is true of other professional athletes or, for that matter,
whether or not the same is true for that really cut, muscular 15 year
old that knocked my son down on the soccer field the other day. Not
really knowing is the norm and, as such, isn't something we can rightly
complain about, IMHO. To think we "really know" about much of anything
is to delude ourselves in most cases.

And, IMHO, the founding fathers of the US did the right thing when they
suggested a person is innocent until proven guilty, and that's how I
choose to look at this one.

Just my opinion.

-S-

Steve Freides said:

There is a great deal, cycling related and otherwise,
about which none of us will really know.
...
Not really knowing is the norm and, as such, isn't
something we can rightly complain about, IMHO.
To think we "really know" about much of anything
is to delude ourselves in most cases.

This place is loaded up with demopublicans. Which means what you said
there will fall on deaf ears.

Quoted message said:

And, IMHO, the founding fathers of the US did the right thing when they
suggested a person is innocent until proven guilty, and that's how I
choose to look at this one.

A "suggestion?" They were talking about crime, where here it is a
private club alleged rule violation, or perhaps even a tort. Um...,
but in essential practice, I think I agree.

Qui si parla Campagnolo said:

WEll, even if he is found guilty or innocent, nobody but one will know
the real truth. We will see the 'results', and he may be exonerated or
sanctioned, but none of us will really know.

I knew you were going to say I wasn't omniscient, but I choose to
ignore the slight. Omnipotent beings are magnanimous. 😉

If we knew it all there'd be no point in watching the race...or racing
for that matter. The interesting stuff is always in the gray area.

R

in 537562 20070228 165907 'Steve Freides said:

And, IMHO, the founding fathers of the US did the right thing when they
suggested a person is innocent until proven guilty, and that's how I
choose to look at this one.

That was taken directly from English law - which had operated in the colonies
for hundreds of years.

"Dan Connelly" <d_j_c_o_n_n_e_l@y_a_h_o_o_._c_o_m> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Qui si parla Campagnolo said:

WEll, even if he is found guilty or innocent, nobody but one will know
the real truth. We will see the 'results', and he may be exonerated or
sanctioned, but none of us will really know.

Anyone who thinks he "knows" about any rider is lying to himself, or is
totally ignorant about the history of sport. Performance is probably as
good of an indicator as a test with proven flaws.

Here's my take - even if he did use testosterone, the studies have shown
that it has NO effect short term and so isn't a performance enhancing drug
overnight.

I don't believe that he took it because he is anything but stupid. No one is
going to take a drug that is so easily ID'd in a urine or blood test.

"Bob Martin" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

in 537562 20070228 165907 "Steve Freides" <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

And, IMHO, the founding fathers of the US did the right thing when they
suggested a person is innocent until proven guilty, and that's how I
choose to look at this one.

That was taken directly from English law - which had operated in the
colonies
for hundreds of years.

And if memory serves that came from Oliver Cromwell's morals. Before that
you were guilty when proclaimed so by anyone with money.

Tom Kunich said:

"Dan Connelly" <d_j_c_o_n_n_e_l@y_a_h_o_o_._c_o_m> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Qui si parla Campagnolo said:

WEll, even if he is found guilty or innocent, nobody but one will know
the real truth. We will see the 'results', and he may be exonerated or
sanctioned, but none of us will really know.

Anyone who thinks he "knows" about any rider is lying to himself, or is
totally ignorant about the history of sport. Performance is probably as
good of an indicator as a test with proven flaws.

Here's my take - even if he did use testosterone, the studies have shown
that it has NO effect short term and so isn't a performance enhancing drug
overnight.

I don't believe that he took it because he is anything but stupid. No one is
going to take a drug that is so easily ID'd in a urine or blood test.

.... and one that doesn't do you much good.

This is basically what I've thought from the beginning, too.

There are SOME benefits to be gained from taking testosterone though (or
so I've been told) including an immediate boost in general feeling of
well-being, as well as aggressiveness. Basically, doping with T. makes
you have a "good day" but on the day you need it.

But mainly, you'd have to be really f'ing stupid to take it because it'd
be so easy to find. Not that he wasn't desperate after that bonk of a
day before... but I still don't think he's that dumb.

-KC

On Feb 28, 5:34 am, "Qui si parla Campagnolo" <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

WEll, even if he is found guilty or innocent,..

Only in Scottish law was there the triad of judgement: 1- guilty, 2-
not guilty, and 3- innocent. I think. Bob Martin, get off your ass
and confirm or deny.

Quoted message said:

But mainly, you'd have to be really f'ing stupid to take it because it'd
be so easy to find. Not that he wasn't desperate after that bonk of a day
before... but I still don't think he's that dumb.

But, as I mentioned before, the "stupidity" defense (as in, who would be
stupid enough to do that, therefor I didn't) is very weak. The people trying
to convict you believe you're stupid because you're doping in the first
place. They already believe in the superiority of their mentality to that of
the accused. Yes, they believe you *are* that stupid, so a denial based on
that logic is very weak.

--Mike Jacoubowsky
Chain Reaction Bicycles
www.ChainReaction.com
Redwood City & Los Altos, CA USA

"Mike Jacoubowsky" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

But mainly, you'd have to be really f'ing stupid to take it because it'd
be so easy to find. Not that he wasn't desperate after that bonk of a
day before... but I still don't think he's that dumb.

But, as I mentioned before, the "stupidity" defense (as in, who would be
stupid enough to do that, therefor I didn't) is very weak. The people
trying to convict you believe you're stupid because you're doping in the
first place. They already believe in the superiority of their mentality to
that of the accused. Yes, they believe you *are* that stupid, so a denial
based on that logic is very weak.

I wonder how you can be so discerning here and such a sucker elsewhere.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

But mainly, you'd have to be really f'ing stupid to take it because it'd
be so easy to find. Not that he wasn't desperate after that bonk of a
day before... but I still don't think he's that dumb.

But, as I mentioned before, the "stupidity" defense (as in, who would be
stupid enough to do that, therefor I didn't) is very weak. The people
trying to convict you believe you're stupid because you're doping in the
first place. They already believe in the superiority of their mentality
to that of the accused. Yes, they believe you *are* that stupid, so a
denial based on that logic is very weak.

I wonder how you can be so discerning here and such a sucker elsewhere.

Hey, it's not *me* who references Ann Coulter! :>😉

--Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycles
www.ChainReactionBicycles.com

in 537598 20070228 232853 'SLAVE of THE STATE said:

On Feb 28, 5:34 am, "Qui si parla Campagnolo" <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

WEll, even if he is found guilty or innocent,..

Only in Scottish law was there the triad of judgement: 1- guilty, 2-
not guilty, and 3- innocent. I think. Bob Martin, get off your ass
and confirm or deny.

Not was - IS. Scotland has 1-guilty, 2-not guilty and 3-not proven.
England and Wales do not have option 3 (which is not a presumption
of innocence btw - only that innocence or guilt could not be established).

Tom Kunich' cyclintom@yahoo. com said:

"Bob Martin" <[email hidden]> wrote in message

news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

in 537562 20070228 165907 "Steve Freides" <[email hidden]>
wrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

And, IMHO, the founding fathers of the US did the right thing when they
suggested a person is innocent until proven guilty, and that's how I
choose to look at this one.

Quoted message said:

That was taken directly from English law - which had operated in the
colonies
for hundreds of years.

And if memory serves that came from Oliver Cromwell's morals. Before that
you were guilty when proclaimed so by anyone with money.

Cromwell was a scumbag - I wouldn't reference him!!

Mike Jacoubowsky said:

Quoted message said:

Bob Roll and Phil Liggett are in Denver today, appearing later at
Wheat Ridge Cyclery. On a local news show this morning, they were
interviewed briefly, and during that interview Phil was asked
specifically what he thought about the Landis affair.

Quoted message said:

His response was interesting. In essence he said, 'from what I know
NOW, Landis WILL be found innocent of the charges and I do not believe
WADA will appeal the decision' (his emphasis, not mine). He went on
to say that he bumped into him in a hotel in California last week and
they talked for about an hour. His conclusion "He did not cheat."

Quoted message said:

I'm guessing Phil must be in on certain info that perhaps we're not
yet privvy to.

Phil has the advantage of having spent an hour with Landis, plus a good deal
of insight into the people who run things (be it WADA, USADA, UCI, ASO etc).
And he, like the rest of us, is probably getting a sense that, over the last
couple of weeks, the tide had changed dramatically. It probably started with
[censored] Pound's ridiculous comment about Landis violating every virgin within
100 miles because of the amount of testosterone he supposedly had. At that
point things jumped from the merely scientific finding of fact to such an
obvious vendetta that reasonable people could no longer ignore it.

--Mike--
Chain Reaction Bicycleswww.ChainReaction.com

NOT saying Landis is guilty or innocent, cuz I and nobody else on the
NG knows, BUT..when I was in the USN one of our LCDRs popped for
cocaine...got off on a technicality, about the chain of custody, but
he was guilty as all holy hell. If Landis gets off, well, he will
always be suspected by the Euros if he races again, because of this
fiasco and because he is an American. I wouldn't be surprised if Floyd
or Tyler get popped again, whether they doped or not.