Road Cycling · Public discussion

Serious Post. Should Floyd confess EVEN if he didn't do it?

Started by Floyd Cheated · · Last activity · 19 posts · 526 views

Thread navigation

Jump through the discussion

Go to the original post, the replies on this page, or the latest preserved contribution.

Thread details

What we know about this thread

Original section
Road Cycling
Published
11 August 2006
Last activity
13 August 2006
Original author
Floyd Cheated
Posts
19
Discussion status
Public discussion
Total views
526
Views / 30 days
0

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

Showing posts 1–19 of 19
Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Text size
  1. Think about it. EVEN IF Floyd beats this rap (probably on a lawyer
    loophole), EVERYONE thinks he's guilty. And a liar.

    His PR people should consider this wise strategy. Confess, even if he
    is innocent. Floyd could say he was desperate, and did cheat. I think
    many people WOULD understand. He would be suspended for a year (UCI has
    a leniency clause). With his hip replacement surgery scheduled the week
    after next, he will need many months of recovery anyway.

    This is much better than taking a four year ban, and everyone thinking
    you are pond scum.

    What do you guys (and gals) think? Even if Floyd didn't cheat, the
    potential upside to confessing far outweighs any possible resolution to
    DopeGate'06.

    I really believ in my heart that Floyd could pull this off. And he
    would be a national hero IF he won the 2008 Tour de France. (clean-of
    course).

    kl

  2. Floyd Cheated said:

    Think about it. EVEN IF Floyd beats this rap (probably on a lawyer
    loophole), EVERYONE thinks he's guilty. And a liar.

    His PR people should consider this wise strategy. Confess, even if he
    is innocent. Floyd could say he was desperate, and did cheat. I think
    many people WOULD understand. He would be suspended for a year (UCI has
    a leniency clause). With his hip replacement surgery scheduled the week
    after next, he will need many months of recovery anyway.

    This is much better than taking a four year ban, and everyone thinking
    you are pond scum.

    What do you guys (and gals) think? Even if Floyd didn't cheat, the
    potential upside to confessing far outweighs any possible resolution to
    DopeGate'06.

    I really believ in my heart that Floyd could pull this off. And he
    would be a national hero IF he won the 2008 Tour de France. (clean-of
    course).

    kl

    http://www.newwest.net/index.php/topic/article/10724/C41/L41

    SPORT SET BACK TWENTY YEARS
    Landis Affair Sucking the Life Out of Cycling
    By Bill Schneider, 8-11-06

    Hollywood could not have come up with a better storyline. A regular
    guy, a relative unknown in cycling with a badly deteriorated hip
    requiring immediate replacement, gradually cranking his way through
    fifteen grueling stages to finally lead the greatest cycling event in
    the world, the Tour de France. Then disaster. He bonked badly on a
    Stage 16 and fell way behind, so far back that expert commentators no
    longer included him on lists of potential winners. But on the very next
    day, Stage 17, he bounced back with a miraculous performance to claw
    his way back into contention. Finally, he reclaimed the maillot
    jaune,the Yellow Jersey, on the final time trial and won the Great
    Race.

    It doesn't get any better than this. Many fans, myself included, were
    worried that cycling might not maintain its highest-ever level of
    popularity, primarily due to the "Lance affect" sweeping the country
    after seven straight wins in Le Tour by arguably the greatest cyclist
    ever, an American no less, Lance Armstrong. A self-described "ordinary
    guy" named Floyd Landis came along and erased those concerns and won
    the hearts of cycling fans.

    For five whole days, euphoria reigned. Landis, an American rider on the
    Swiss Phonak team, had won the Tour de France in the most dramatic
    fashion. Cycling commentators Phil Liggett and Bob Roll gushed over
    Landis's performance in Stage 17 when he rode away from the entire
    peloton, a superhuman feat, and caught a thirteen-man breakaway,
    dropped them, too, and went on to finish six minutes ahead of the
    current leaders of the race. Both Roll and Liggett boasted that this it
    was the best single-day race they'd ever seen, and that comes from guys
    who have seen many thousands of them.

    I concur with Liggett and Roll. That morning I'd planned to tape that
    stage and watch it later, but as I started the tape rolling at 5:30 am,
    I was quickly captivated by the unfolding drama and spent the next four
    hours glued to the tube--even blasting out a few cheers for nobody to
    hear.

    Suddenly, we had a new hero, and you know how badly we need them
    nowadays. On club rides everywhere, people were all-Landis and saying,
    "Lance who?" And Landis was looking at a platinum future--a
    seven-figure contract renewal with Phonak and iShares (his team
    sponsors) many millions worth of endorsements, book deals, his own
    brand of bicycle gear, a visit to the Oval Office, chats with Larry
    King and Jay Leno, and more--almost too much for an "ordinary guy" to
    fathom.

    Then, just as suddenly, it was all gone.

    We know the rest of the story. On July 27, five days after yellow-clad,
    champagne-sipping Landis pedaled into the Champs-Élysées and kissed
    the podium girls, his team announced he had failed his drug test after
    that amazing Stage 17. This has to be the biggest and fastest falling
    from grace in the history of sports.

    I'll spare you the complications of the drug-testing process, but in
    brief, Landis is accused of having an oversupply of testosterone in his
    body. The allowable limit is a 4:1 ratio between testosterone and
    epitestosterone. The body produces both substances, and the normal
    ratio ranges from 2:1 to 3:1. When elevated, it indicates that the
    athlete has taken in extra testosterone, the granddaddy of all
    steroids. Landis tested 11:1 in his A sample. Two weeks later, tests on
    his B sample confirmed an extra-high level.

    As claims by Landis that he naturally produces a lot of testosterone
    echoed across the globe, the New York Times revealed that he had
    exogenous (contained within, but originating from outside the body)
    testosterone in his system, which must be externally introduced with
    the use of a patch, injection or lotion. Current tests can
    differentiate between natural and synthetic testosterone. Landis had
    both in his system.

    In this country, thankfully, we have the presumption of innocence.
    Landis maintains his innocence and has hired high-profile lawyer Howard
    Jacobs to represent him in upcoming appeals and court appearances.
    Meanwhile, and ever-so-sadly, the affair is sucking the life out of
    cycling.

    Fans everywhere are retreating to the "they're all doping" attitude.
    Excitement for the sport among both diehards and the newly converted is
    vanishing. Sponsors are bailing out (possibly the true death knell),
    and race promoters who were trumpeting their good fortune of having the
    Tour de France winner sign up for their race "un-invited" Landis. Oh
    yes, and his team fired him.

    The death toll is mounting. Landis's team title sponsor Phonak, a Swiss
    manufacturer of hearing aids, rocked by this and earlier doping
    scandals on its team, decided to leave the sport of cycling. A Phonak
    team doctor defended Landis but admitted that "the damage to his image
    is gigantic." Co-sponsor of the Phonak team, iShares, the world's
    largest seller of Exchange Traded Funds, also quit the sport because of
    the Landis affair, even though the California-based company had already
    signed a three-year sponsorship deal going to 2009. Germany television
    officials are considering not covering Le Tour in the future because of
    doping scandals. Skoda, a Czech car manufacturer, canceled its
    sponsorship for next year's Tour de France. Back in the USA, Tour of
    Georgia sponsor Ford decided not to renew its sponsorship of the
    biggest cycling event in this country, although not specifically
    attributing it to the Landis affair.

    And nobody believes they have heard the last of the giant sucking sound
    currently siphoning the energy, enthusiasm and money out of cycling.

    Patrick Lefevere, president of an organization of all professional
    cycling teams, has taken the issue one step further. He considers
    Landis personally and financially liable for the losses the sport is
    suffering.

    "Actually, we should take him to court for what he is now doing to
    cycling," said Lefevere, team manager of Belgium's Quick Step team.
    "Why not? Why not take the American approach of dealing with things and
    apply it here? As long as Landis continues to maintain that he knows
    nothing, this sort of scenario becomes more likely. I feel like
    throwing up when I hear him. Landis has turned the clock back 20
    years."

    The cycling media, like Velonews.com and Cyclingnews.com, are
    desperately trying to re-focus attention on positive cycling news such
    as the results of other races and new gear innovations, but the Landis
    affair hangs over their efforts like a black cloud.

    As cycling fans, teams, sponsors and race promoters continue to assess
    the devastation, 30-year-old Landis prepares for his hip replacement
    surgery on August 21. I hope the surgery goes well, but I already know
    he will never be the same person he was on July 26. I just hope cycling
    will be the same someday in the future.

    Like this story? Get more! Sign up for our free newsletters.

    By Bill Schneider, 8-11-06

  3. Floyd Cheated said:

    Think about it. EVEN IF Floyd beats this rap (probably on a lawyer
    loophole), EVERYONE thinks he's guilty. And a liar.

    His PR people should consider this wise strategy. Confess, even if he
    is innocent. Floyd could say he was desperate, and did cheat. I think
    many people WOULD understand. He would be suspended for a year (UCI has
    a leniency clause). With his hip replacement surgery scheduled the week
    after next, he will need many months of recovery anyway.

    This is much better than taking a four year ban, and everyone thinking
    you are pond scum.

    What do you guys (and gals) think? Even if Floyd didn't cheat, the
    potential upside to confessing far outweighs any possible resolution to
    DopeGate'06.

    I really believ in my heart that Floyd could pull this off. And he
    would be a national hero IF he won the 2008 Tour de France. (clean-of
    course).

    kl

    There is no leniency if you admit it AFTER being caught. Matt Decanio
    came clean on his own and was given leniency as a result. Best you can
    hope for now is 2010, and that's unlikely.

    But I think you're right. Look at the earning potential of Tyler
    Hamilton right now. ZERO. Floyd still has time to reconsider, sign a
    book deal with Judith Regan (while people still remember who he is) and
    make another few million bucks. Maybe a made-for-TV movie or screen
    deal for his story. It will probably be the last "few million" he'll
    ever make, but that's enough to retire on, perhaps get a color
    commentating gig, and exit the sport with some amount of respect
    intact. In the face of all this hoo-ha, he actually has a small window
    of opportunity to turn this into something more positive than negative.
    But that window is closing. Once he gets booted into obscurity, he'll
    stay obscure. Unfortunately, most of those who get busted choose to go
    down in flames.

  4. Quoted message said:
    Floyd Cheated said:

    Think about it. EVEN IF Floyd beats this rap (probably on a lawyer
    loophole), EVERYONE thinks he's guilty. And a liar.

    His PR people should consider this wise strategy. Confess, even if he
    is innocent. Floyd could say he was desperate, and did cheat. I think
    many people WOULD understand. He would be suspended for a year (UCI has
    a leniency clause). With his hip replacement surgery scheduled the week
    after next, he will need many months of recovery anyway.

    This is much better than taking a four year ban, and everyone thinking
    you are pond scum.

    What do you guys (and gals) think? Even if Floyd didn't cheat, the
    potential upside to confessing far outweighs any possible resolution to
    DopeGate'06.

    I really believ in my heart that Floyd could pull this off. And he
    would be a national hero IF he won the 2008 Tour de France. (clean-of
    course).

    kl

    There is no leniency if you admit it AFTER being caught. Matt Decanio
    came clean on his own and was given leniency as a result. Best you can
    hope for now is 2010, and that's unlikely.

    But I think you're right. Look at the earning potential of Tyler
    Hamilton right now. ZERO. Floyd still has time to reconsider, sign a
    book deal with Judith Regan (while people still remember who he is) and
    make another few million bucks. Maybe a made-for-TV movie or screen
    deal for his story. It will probably be the last "few million" he'll
    ever make, but that's enough to retire on, perhaps get a color
    commentating gig, and exit the sport with some amount of respect
    intact. In the face of all this hoo-ha, he actually has a small window
    of opportunity to turn this into something more positive than negative.
    But that window is closing. Once he gets booted into obscurity, he'll
    stay obscure. Unfortunately, most of those who get busted choose to go
    down in flames.

    Might be the right thing to do.

  5. Not Floyd. It won't really help him to confess if he was clean.

    However, I was thinking the same situation for Justin Gatlin, who is
    being offered immunity from lifetime ban if he testifies against his
    coach. Now that's a little more incentive.

  6. Bucky said:

    Not Floyd. It won't really help him to confess if he was clean.

    However, I was thinking the same situation for Justin Gatlin, who is
    being offered immunity from lifetime ban if he testifies against his
    coach. Now that's a little more incentive.

    Confess even if he didn't do it, kind of like Martha Stewart going
    ahead and doing her jail time even before her appeal was adjudicated,
    just to get rid of it so it wouldn't be hanging over her anymore?
    Seems to have worked out ok for her.

  7. No. If you are innocent then there is a way, some loose end that will
    prove your innocence- the real trick is finding it.

  8. MyPostingID said:

    Confess even if he didn't do it, kind of like Martha Stewart going
    ahead and doing her jail time even before her appeal was adjudicated,
    just to get rid of it so it wouldn't be hanging over her anymore?
    Seems to have worked out ok for her.

    Not exactly, because Martha actually did it. She just realized that she
    might as well get it over with.

  9. in message <[email hidden]>,

    (') said:

    No. If you are innocent then there is a way, some loose end that will
    prove your innocence- the real trick is finding it.

    But if you're deluding yourself that you're innocent - that the 'little
    bit' you were doing was 'OK' - which is what most of the dopers seem to
    do...

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

    [ This .sig subject to change without notice ]

  10. Simon Brooke said:

    in message <[email hidden]>,

    (') said:

    No. If you are innocent then there is a way, some loose end that will
    prove your innocence- the real trick is finding it.

    But if you're deluding yourself that you're innocent - that the 'little
    bit' you were doing was 'OK' - which is what most of the dopers seem to
    do...

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

    [ This .sig subject to change without notice ]

    then you are guilty, and your ability to prove your "innocence" is not
    certain. to clarify, what I am saying is that if there is a procedural
    error, some scientific oversight or whatever, then there will be a way
    to determine that caused an erronious result. no crime is ever perfect,
    there is always a loose end.

  11. If Floyd is innocent, then he should not waver from his position. He has to
    satisfy no one's conscience but his own. You 'all out here are going to
    believe what you believe.

    If he is guilty, then it is all about strategy.

    Advising him to plead guilt when he is innocent is a stupid strategy.

    All this does is satisfy you dorks out here, who can see that he is not
    going to get off, so want him to be guilty. You hate the idea of an innocent
    going to the wall, so you hope he is guilty. Because once the doping crowd
    get hold of you the system is gamed to one outcome. And that is suspension
    or worse.

    You all know that outcome, and you all look the other way.

    Like when that lady in Australia had her baby taken by a Dingo. ("A dingo
    ate my baby!"😉 Everyone wqas so horrified that a dingo could eat her baby
    that they preferred to find her guilt of merdering her baby.

    I think she spent 7 years in jail to satisfy the public discomfort.

  12. Floyd Cheated said:

    Think about it. EVEN IF Floyd beats this rap (probably on a lawyer
    loophole), EVERYONE thinks he's guilty. And a liar.

    His PR people should consider this wise strategy. Confess, even if he
    is innocent. Floyd could say he was desperate, and did cheat. I think
    many people WOULD understand. He would be suspended for a year (UCI has
    a leniency clause). With his hip replacement surgery scheduled the week
    after next, he will need many months of recovery anyway.

    This is much better than taking a four year ban, and everyone thinking
    you are pond scum.

    What do you guys (and gals) think? Even if Floyd didn't cheat, the
    potential upside to confessing far outweighs any possible resolution to
    DopeGate'06.

    I really believ in my heart that Floyd could pull this off. And he
    would be a national hero IF he won the 2008 Tour de France. (clean-of
    course).

    kl

    IF Floyd didn't cheat, I don't think he should confess to something he
    didn't do. If he did, he should come clean now and get it over with.
    Why does Patrick Lefevre want to sue only Floyd? What about all the
    other riders that were implicated in Operacion Puerto? Haven't they
    damaged the image of cycling, too? Phonak had announced they were
    pulling out of their sponsorship before Floyd's problems, so we can't
    blame that one on him.

    Smokey

  13. "Floyd Cheated" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    Think about it. EVEN IF Floyd beats this rap (probably on a lawyer
    loophole), EVERYONE thinks he's guilty. And a liar.

    His PR people should consider this wise strategy. Confess, even if he
    is innocent. Floyd could say he was desperate, and did cheat. I think
    many people WOULD understand. He would be suspended for a year (UCI has
    a leniency clause). With his hip replacement surgery scheduled the week
    after next, he will need many months of recovery anyway.

    This is much better than taking a four year ban, and everyone thinking
    you are pond scum.

    What do you guys (and gals) think? Even if Floyd didn't cheat, the
    potential upside to confessing far outweighs any possible resolution to
    DopeGate'06.

    I really believ in my heart that Floyd could pull this off. And he
    would be a national hero IF he won the 2008 Tour de France. (clean-of
    course).

    kl

    Confess to something he didn't do? That's ridiculous. It it was me that was
    wrongfully accused I'd be screaming it from the rooftops that I didn't do
    it. I'd be angry, enraged, and ruthlessly and breathlessly determined to
    communicate this in no uncertain terms to anyone and everyone that will
    listen, just like Mr. Landis is currently doing... oh wait, nevermind.

  14. JessicaG said:
    Quoted message said:


    Confess to something he didn't do? That's ridiculous. It it was me that was
    wrongfully accused I'd be screaming it from the rooftops that I didn't do
    it. I'd be angry, enraged, and ruthlessly and breathlessly determined to
    communicate this in no uncertain terms to anyone and everyone that will
    listen, just like Mr. Landis is currently doing... oh wait, nevermind.

    he didn't really do that very well, actually more like a suspect in a
    tv cop show during interrogation, one story after another. and further,
    he waited to ask for a b sample test; if you are innocent, yes you
    would want every test done asap dna tests everything that could clear
    you pronto.

  15. Floyd Cheated said:

    Think about it. EVEN IF Floyd beats this rap (probably on a lawyer
    loophole), EVERYONE thinks he's guilty. And a liar.

    His PR people should consider this wise strategy. Confess, even if he
    is innocent.

    Confession if you are innocent seems crazy. The "consent decree"
    approach might make more sense. Cut a deal all around to save everybody
    pain. Maybe something like this:

    1. Floyd doesn't acknowledge guilt, and may continue to claim
    innocence, but acknowledges that there is substantial evidence against
    him.
    2. Floyd gives up the TdF crown.
    3. Floyd accepts a lesser ban (say, 1 year + 1 year rather than 2 years
    + 2 years). Floyd also agrees to enhanced testing at his expense should
    he return to racing.
    4. UCI (etc.) get this over quickly. From pro tour standpoint, riders
    are expendable but team sponsors and media money has to be protected.
    [Anyone who works for a large corporation knows this logic extends far
    beyond bicycle racing.]

  16. On Sat, 12 Aug 2006 13:36:30 -0400, "mal" <[email hidden]> a
    écrit :

    Quoted message said:


    Like when that lady in Australia had her baby taken by a Dingo. ("A dingo
    ate my baby!"😉 Everyone wqas so horrified that a dingo could eat her baby
    that they preferred to find her guilt of merdering her baby.

    I think she spent 7 years in jail to satisfy the public discomfort.

    That was an interesting case

    I sort of thought that she had done the kid in myself

    What was the eventual consensus on the case?

    I didn't follow it up subsequent to the conviction

    --
    Davey on the road again

  17. mal said:
    Quoted message said:

    Like when that lady in Australia had her baby taken by a Dingo. ("A dingo
    ate my baby!"😉 Everyone wqas so horrified that a dingo could eat her baby
    that they preferred to find her guilt of merdering her baby.

    Davey Crockett said:

    What was the eventual consensus on the case?
    I didn't follow it up subsequent to the conviction

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Azaria_Chamberlain_disappearance

  18. Donald Munro said:


    Davey Crockett said:

    What was the eventual consensus on the case?
    I didn't follow it up subsequent to the conviction

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Azaria_Chamberlain_disappearance

    This is my favourite: "The prosecution successfully argued that the
    pivotal haemoglobin tests indicated the presence of foetal haemoglobin
    in the Chamberlains' car, and that it was a significant factor in the
    original conviction. But it was later shown that these tests were
    highly unreliable, and that similar tests conducted on the substance
    used to rust-proof the body of the car had yielded virtually identical
    results."

    Thanks for the link. Brought back memories of growing up in Oz, where
    we used to rust-proof our Kingswoods with the blood of newborns. Better
    than eating babies, like the French do.

    Jeff

  19. Davey Crockett said:
    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    What was the eventual consensus on the case?
    I didn't follow it up subsequent to the conviction

    Donald Munro said:
    Quoted message said:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Azaria_Chamberlain_disappearance

    Jeff Jones said:

    This is my favourite: "The prosecution successfully argued that the
    pivotal haemoglobin tests indicated the presence of foetal haemoglobin
    in the Chamberlains' car, and that it was a significant factor in the
    original conviction. But it was later shown that these tests were
    highly unreliable, and that similar tests conducted on the substance
    used to rust-proof the body of the car had yielded virtually identical
    results."

    So now tyler can go one up on VDB and say a dingo did it.

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.