Road Cycling · Public discussion

Race to the Bottom

Started by Email address hidden · · Last activity · 1 post · 527 views

Thread details

What we know about this thread

Original section
Road Cycling
Published
21 May 2007
Last activity
21 May 2007
Original author
Email address hidden
Posts
1
Discussion status
Public discussion
Total views
527
Views / 30 days
0

The navigation and discussion metadata provide context. Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Showing posts 1–1 of 1
Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Text size
  1. A Chicago Tribune Sports Weblog by Philip Hersh

    May 20, 2007
    Floyd can't escape his Bonds

    Floyd Landis already has lost.

    Big time.

    Landis' attorneys may convince a U.S. arbitration panel that his
    positive doping test should be thrown out because the French lab's
    testing was sloppy or scientifically flawed. That argument may fly
    again when the international Court of Arbitration for Sport hears what
    is certain to be an appeal of a decision exonerating Landis.

    Landis can appeal as well if the U.S. panel finds him guilty as
    charged in a hearing that resumes Monday.

    Makes no difference.

    Landis has assassinated his own character, which he insists is so
    beyond reproach no one could possibly question his denials of doping.

    He may keep his 2006 Tour de France title but he has lost the
    moral authority that made his triumph resonate as more than that of
    just another good athlete.

    Landis was the polite young man with the Mennonite upbringing. He
    was the son who found a way to reconcile his sport with respect for
    his parents and their faith even after abandoning its precepts to
    become the cyclist who won the Tour -- with a bum hip.

    Until last week.

    Now Landis is about to win what he called ``a race to the bottom''
    -- a place where moral turns into venal, where proclamations of
    absolute innocence disappear into the abyss of ethical equivocation.

    His descent began in an Internet posting that threatened three-
    time Tour de France winner Greg LeMond. It took him over the
    precipice when Landis testified to having all but ignored his former
    business manager's threatening phone call to LeMond the night before
    he was to testify in the hearing.

    LeMond's testimony may be thrown out on an appeal by Landis'
    attorney Howard Jacobs. He appealed after trying to question LeMond
    about areas that might show he had a motive to testify against Landis,
    but LeMond declined to answer on advice of his attorney.

    LeMond's testimony isn't relevant or really damaging to the crux
    of Landis' defense, anyway. LeMond's assertion that Landis admitted
    having taken drugs in a phone conversation between the two soon
    (Landis called LeMond) after his positive test became public isn't of
    much value either. The conversation apparently wasn't recorded, and
    Landis testified Saturday that he had neither made such an admission
    nor taken banned substances.

    Doesn't matter. In the court of public opinion, the testimony
    will carry enormous weight.

    ``Why should this arbitration panel believe you?'' Jacobs asked
    Landis on the stand.

    ``People are defined by their principles and how they make their
    decisions,'' Landis answered.

    *First defining moment, from LeMond's testimony:

    LeMond tells Landis in the phone conversation if he had taken
    drugs, he should fess up for the good of the sport and for his own
    mental health. LeMond illustrates his reasons by sharing an intensely
    personal story that remains private until LeMond retells it at the
    hearing: he could not get beyond having been sexually abused as a
    child until admitting to loved ones several years later that it had
    happened. LeMond says keeping the secret preyed on his mind for all
    those years.

    LeMond's testimony echoes what he told me in an interview the day
    Landis' team announced the positive test, although he did not mention
    sexual abuse, saying only that it was a significant personal problem.
    As I quoted LeMond in the July 28, 2006 Tribune: ``I hope like heck
    (the B sample test) comes out negative. If not, I hope Floyd has the
    courage and integrity to come clean, for his own well-being and for
    the sport. I believe human beings are capable of empathy and
    forgiveness.''

    Empathy? Forgiveness? This is what Landis -- apparently angered by
    what LeMond was saying to the media -- posted on the Internet after
    his phone conversation with LeMond:

    ``...if (LeMond) ever opens his mouth again and the word Floyd comes
    out, I will tell you all some things you wish you didn't know and
    unfortunately I will have entered the race to the bottom which is now
    in progress.''

    I guess you don't have to dope to be a dope.

    *Second defining moment, from testimony of both LeMond and Landis.

    Landis' former business manager, Will Geoghegan, tries to pass himself
    as LeMond's uncle while calling him to threaten revelation of the
    abuse secret if LeMond testifies. Two days later, Landis admits he
    was in the room when Geoghegan called, later hears Geoghegan deny he
    was the caller to LeMond, then does nothing about it.

    That's right. Nothing.

    Clearly doesn't tell his own attorneys, who learn of the incident when
    LeMond testifies to it the next day. (The attorneys look silly as
    they announce a few minutes later that Geoghegan is fired.) Doesn't
    tell the police. Doesn't tell anyone.

    That's wrong.

    Of course, Landis obviously had told Geoghegan about LeMond's sexual
    abuse story. Some secrets, Landis apparently can't keep.

    Which is fine, because now the secret is out about Floyd Landis'
    principles.

    We know who he is now.

    Barry Bonds on a bicycle.

    (END)

    in cycling | Permalink | Comments (0)
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    May 10, 2007
    Lance in the shadows

    The Tour of Italy begins Saturday without both its defending champion,
    Ivan Basso, and its 2002 runner-up, Tyler Hamilton.

    Floyd Landis begins the race for his cycling life Monday in a Malibu,
    Calif., hearing room.

    The link among them? Doping -- and Lance Armstrong.

    The circumstances that put each of these three riders where they are
    -- or aren't -- lengthen the shadows over Armstrong's reputation as
    one of the greatest champions in an increasingly infamous sport.

    Guilt by association? True of almost everyone in cycling's elite,
    perhaps a little more for Armstrong, who maintains he never took
    banned performance-enhancing drugs yet utterly dominated the Tour de
    France when it was full of dopers.

    I'll begin with the necessary disclaimer: Armstrong never has been
    sanctioned for doping and officially has tested positive just once --
    that was traces of a banned corticosteroid in a skin cream for saddle
    sores that he had a therapeutic exemption to use. The exemption, it
    has been reported, was conveniently post-dated, an apparently routine
    practice in cycling.

    The French newspaper L'Equipe reported in 2005 that retroactive
    retesting of frozen urine samples from Armstrong's first Tour de
    France triumph year, 1999, found him positive six times for EPO, the
    banned blood-booster cycling did not test for until 2001. But
    Armstrong thinks L'Equipe is nothing more than a shill for the Tour
    management that belongs to the same parent company. Why that
    management would want disgrace cast on its race is hard to understand.

    Suspicious? Sure. Indisputable proof? Hardly.

    But Lance's riding buddies face more than suspicions.

    Hamilton? Support rider for Armstrong in three of his seven Tour de
    France victories. Returned to competition this season after serving
    two-year suspension for blood doping. Suspended Wednesday from
    competing in the Tour of Italy by his new team, Tinkoff Credit
    Systems. Why? Hamilton's name has been linked to the Spanish doctor at
    the center of Operation Puerto, the biggest scandal to hit a sport
    that has known little but scandal for a decade.
    Landis? Support rider for Armstrong in three of his Tour de France
    victories. Tested positive for anabolic steroid testosterone after he
    went from a beaten rider to Tour de France winner during the dramatic
    17th stage of the 2006 race. Like Hamilton, maintains his innocence.
    Landis' defense team will argue at the hearing that bad science, bad
    bookkeeping and what they call a suspect lab all contributed to an
    unfair conclusion that Landis had doped.
    Basso? Would be riding for Armstrong's old Discovery Channel team, of
    which Armstrong is a co-owner, were he not caught up in Operation
    Puerto. Basso quit the team last month, six days after it suspended
    him, but you'll still find his picture and bio on the Discovery
    cycling Web site, not far from the link to the Lance Armstrong
    Foundation.
    (By the way, Discovery Communications has given up sponsorship of the
    cycling team after this season. They're no dopes.)

    The Basso situation is, in some ways, the most damning to Armstrong.
    The Discovery Channel team, which means Armstrong, gave the proverbial
    finger to the cycling world when it signed the Italian last fall,
    after he had been banned from the 2006 Tour de France because of his
    implication in Operation Puerto.

    Tuesday, after fessing up his actual involvement in Operation Puerto
    to Italian Olympic Committee investigators, Basso told a news
    conference he was guilty only of "attempted doping" in a "moment of
    weakness." He said he had never taken a doping substance or engaged in
    blood doping.

    Such a lovely turn of phrase: attempted doping. Isn't that like an
    attempted robbery that doesn't get carried out because the police show
    up and catch you hiding in the shadows?

    in cycling | Permalink | Comments (3)
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Active in the last 60 minutes

Active in this thread

0 users · 0 guests ·0 bots ·0 total

No signed-in users are active right now.

No known search crawlers active right now.