Could Floyd Landis contest the 2010 Tour de France? Up to now, I would not have predicted that this would be in the realm of the possible. But then again, I just saw an article by Larry Fine of Reuters (hat tip to strbuk for pointing it out to me) that quotes Landis as saying he’s considering whether to target the 2010 Grande Boucle.
“I will take a few weeks of peace and quiet to assess what I want to do with the next years of my life, if it leads me to want to do the Tour de France again and all the chaos that surrounds a bicycle race,” he told Reuters in a telephone interview.
“I would have to make a decision by the time this Tour de France came around.
“If I went back to the Tour de France the objective would be to win it again,” Landis said. “And the objective would be for the resulting win to give me some time to enjoy it rather than the way it played out last time.
“I would like to win the race and go home and spend time with everybody that supported me and enjoy it rather than spending the next couple of years defending how I won it.”
It takes a certain inner toughness to endure the kind of struggles Landis encountered over the two-plus years that his anti-doping case dragged on. It takes an even greater toughness to live with a gradually degenerating hip — and somehow manage to compete at the highest levels of his sport. Landis has lived through both. And, as long time followers of his story know, the hip has been replaced and works as good as new.
Given that he’s survived all of that, I have no doubt that if Landis decides to make a run at the 2010 Tour de France, he’s going to put every bit of energy into the effort, and that he’ll have a tenacious focus on his goal.
There’s only two things that could get in the way of racing in France in 2010. First, he would have to be hired by a ProTour team, or one of the more regular wild-card teams that gets invited to the race. Second, the ASO would have to find it in their hearts to allow Landis to participate.
As far as that other suspension — the one in France — goes, that’s history, too. But the lingering question is whether or not there are any hard feelings over at the headquarters of Le Tour’s organizers. Last year and this year they’ve been unafraid to keep teams (Astana last year, Fuji this year) they felt besmirched the good name of their signature event. Could they do so again in 2010? And if so, would the team affected by such a move be Landis’ employers at the time? Hard to say. I have a hunch that he wouldn’t be signing on with a team plagued by doping allegations, however. And that would at least work somewhat in his favor.
Clearly, according to Rice’s article, Landis is energized by the reception he’s gotten — both from fans and his fellow pros — since his return to the peloton during the Tour of California.
“The reaction of the fans after being away for that long, it was overwhelming. I was kind of caught off guard by how happy everybody was to have me back. I was touched.”
Good to hear. It’s great to see Landis racing again. And it’s a nice way to re-enter the pro ranks to do so by racing over here, where many who haven’t had the chance to see him race will get the opportunity to do so — at least this year. If he does make the decision to make a run at the 2010 Tour, and if he does sign with a team that will be in the thick of the action, it’s pretty much a given that he won’t be able to do his preparation under the radar.
“It’ll be a different scenario this time,” [Landis told Reuters.] “The last time I was able to do it without a whole lot of attention outside of the cycling world.
“There will be more of everything now. More press, more pressure, more of everything that makes it a more difficult race. But I certainly don’t dread it.”
If there’s anyone who can pull something like this off (besides the obvious comparison in one Mr. Lance Armstrong), it would be Floyd Landis. Over the coming weeks, he’ll be thinking about whether to go for it. If he does, he’ll be gunning for the top spot on the podium, to be sure. And if he were to win it all, that would truly be the best revenge.
And it would also be one hell of a cause for celebration. Now, I just need to figure out how to come up with some sort of assignment to cover a certain three-week bicycle race come July 2010. I might even have to dust off a camera or two for the adventure.
There is the little deal of that guideline that Pro Tour teams can’t hire someone for an additional two years after the suspension. That guideline has been broken of course, and I can’t remember if it was a non Pro Tour team, or a Pro Tour team that simply hadn’t signed on with whatever convention that agreement is in.
But in any case it would be exactly the sort of provocation that ASO could use against him.
Gloom and doom aside, GO FLOYD! I’d love to see him win it again.
tom
It’s probably more of a ‘Dream’ scenario, but yeah, it’d be worth a trip to Europe to see this.
Sadly, I smell the snarkers and attacking trollers coming out, and I think the ASO’s sensibilities are going to make this a unique challenge. The question is, does he (Floyd) really want to go through it again? Weaker men have literally DIED trying (Pantani).
Tom,
Is Liquigas ProTour or Pro Continental? They’ve certainly set an example in hiring Basso, as far as ignoring that bit about the extra two years if they’re a ProTour squad. Seems to me one or two other ProTour squads have hired riders returning from suspensions when they “shouldn’t have,” too. I could see that as the kind of thing ASO might use to keep a team out next year. But if Landis has ridden cleanly and without any scandal between now and then, they may have some serious egg on their faces doing that. (Not that I wouldn’t be surprised if they did, either.)
RW,
I’m not sure whether this is a “dream scenario.” If it came to pass, it would definitely be worth a trip to Europe to see. The big questions are, as you say, would Floyd want to do it, could he get a contract, and would the team be allowed to race. Though, on that last point, given ASO’s history so far, they could only really keep him out in 2010. The following year, assuming “good behavior,” there would be a lot of pressure to let him race. And by then, he’d have two solid years of racing to rebuild his fitness for the task, too. Hmm.
Hi,
I found the article I had in my head when I wrote the comment above:
http://www.velonews.com/article/86535
tom
I’d really like Floyd to race in the tour and even win it again. And yes, I said again. It would be great if he could do it without them being able to claim any type of foul play whatsoever. Don’t know if it will happen though.
Floyd more than deserves to race in the TdF again, if he wants to. (IMHO)
Whether he will or not will depend upon a wide variety of factors. The will to go, signing with a team that can get an invite (ASO invites at their discretion), being designated a team leader, ASO not blackballing Floyd’s hypothetical team that would otherwise get an invite, and so on. It will be a delicate political dance and ASO holds the veto card.
Sucks.
I would love to see FL race the TdeF. Rant, I just read about LA having a sample of his hair taken in an French doping test. Can you enlighten us on how much can be revealed in the test? The specifics of what they are looking for? The UCI doesn’t support it but the AFLD does.
Luc,
I’m not aware of what performance enhancing drugs AFLD thinks they can detect using hair samples. I’ve not heard of any specific tests for EPO, steroids, or other typical PEDs used by cyclists that are conducted using hair samples. From my own experience, I’ve had to give hair samples twice related for employment/pre-employment drug screenings. In those cases, they were looking for evidence of the use of recreational drugs (cocaine, marijuana, and so forth). Many recreational drugs are on WADA’s banned substances list, too, so perhaps AFLD is looking for that.
Then again, perhaps they took the sample for the simple reason, “because they can.”
AFLD takes hair samples because they can find some drugs inside. But hairs can be contaminated so they use it for their targetting. On last TDF they had taken hair of all riders.
Jean,
I’d forgotten about AFLD’s taking hair samples at the TdF. Do you know what drugs they’re looking for in hair samples, besides recreational drugs like cocaine and marijuana?
I would think that first of all, Landis needs to demonstrate that he is still (or again) capable of competing at the top level during the course of this season. Or perhaps some PT team might want to sign him on for the PR value.
Hair samples are not rocket science. Hair grows relatively slowly and retains markers of a variety of substances, smoked, injected, ingested…..
As Rant has indicated, hair samples are frequently taken when there is suspected involvement with recreational drugs, such as marijuana and cocaine. WRT marijuana, THC is fat soluable and usually stays in the system for ~a month after use has been discontinued. Cocaine can be flushed much more quickly. However, in both cases, use can be detected via hair samples.
I’m not sure how I feel about AFLD tking it upon itself to collect hair samples, but taking hair samples isn’t particularly invasive, compred to urine/blood/tissue samples.
Jean C didn’t really answer Rant’s question. Does he know what drugs they’re looking for in hair samples, besides recreational drugs like cocaine and marijuana? Can he elaborate about possible contamination of hair samples? I understand the targeting part. No elaboration needed there.
Jeff,
I saw an article on ESPN.com that suggests that AFLD is looking for evidence of DHEA use in hair samples, and perhaps other banned substances, too. Not sure on the real science behind detecting DHEA use, as it’s a naturally occurring compound, too. Perhaps the infamous IRMS/CIR test would be involved. ALFD admits these aren’t official doping tests in the article. I think we need to know a lot more about how these tests work before the idea of hair sample testing for DHEA or other PEDs could even be used as a screening test, much less a test for sanctioning athletes.
Thank you for the link to the article Rant.
Where to start? At the risk of again repeating myself and also preaching to the choir, much of the problem lies at the door of WADA and its approved labs. The WADA system is closed and not subject to outside peer review. They are, for all practical purposes, claiming to be the world’s only authority on anti-doping and it’s just not true. There are many experts in the field that were previously employed by the system and some experts in the field that were never aligned with the system.
There is ample opportunity for outside peer review, but WADA does not seek, accept, nor desire it. One is left to wonder why?
WADA has publicly stated at least one of the reasons and it has to do with a streamlined system of punishment for “offenders”. The problem is that without independent peer review of the science behind the tests, many a learned scientist and many a less knowledgeable skeptic, like me, are left to conclude that we don’t really know if the WADA labs are actually competent or if the myriad of tests are actually fit for purpose. There is little proof they actually know who the “offenders” are. (Although they can usually find their own rear ends if they use both hands)
WADA was set up to cover IOC’s arse and is more about protecting the monetarily valuable “Olympic Brand” that anything to do with lofty goals like athletes’ health or fair competition. I, for one, will not begin to respect what WADA, and its affiliates, do until they operate in a sufficiently transparent way. Until then, it’s largely garbage in and garbage out.
I’m not sure if AFLD is within its rights to take hair samples, but suspect it is.
However, AFLD has again clearly shown contempt for the very code they helped create. Under the code, the details of testing specific athletes is a confidential matter for the labs, unless and until such time as testing triggers an AAF. (The athlete may reveal details at his/her discretion)
From yahoosports.com:
“He was surprised we asked for a hair sample, he asked some questions,” Jean-Pierre Verdy, the AFLD’s operating chief, told Reuters after an AFLD meeting on Wednesday.
AFLD President Pierre Bordry told a news conference the move was also aimed at showing Armstrong he was “a rider like any other.”
“He must know that he is like everybody else,” said Bordry.
“It is the first time we knew, from press reports, that he was training in France.”
Pierre Bordry exceeded his mandate when he revealed/reported hair samples were taken from Armstrong. It’s not AFLD’s (or any other WADA approved lab’s) job to show a particular rider the he is “a rider like any other” or to teach anyone that “He must know he is like anybody else”. It is AFLD’s job to take samples, test them, and make a report if the test(s) trigger an AAF. Their job is not to modify the socialization characteristics of athletes.
Bordry also states a falsehood (he lied). AFLD is privy to the whereabouts system. If they are relying on press reports and twitter to locate Armstrong, or any other rider, in France, then they are not employing or don’t know how to use the whereabouts system.
Sounding more and more like an incompetent lab with amateur leadership all the time…..
What I find interesting is this part:
What is Bordry suggesting? That Armstrong believes he deserves special treatment? From all his tweets and comments in the press, he seems to fully expect to be tested, and says basically, “bring it on.” Perhaps Bordry’s been quoted out of context, but his comment has a vaguely arrogant ring to it.
And it does seem to be out of place to be holding a press conference about testing Armstrong, or any other athlete for that matter. Confidentiality is supposed to be part of the WADA code, after all. Or do they believe that because Armstrong has tweeted a comment every time he’s been tested that this somehow allows them to comment on the testing, too?
From what I read DHEA is:
1. a naturally occurring substance
2. levels increase with exercise
3. a placebo controlled study found no effects on lean body mass, strength, or testosterone levels.
It has been used by some athletes as a reputed performance-enhancing drug, although there is apparently no scientific evidence that it does enhance performance.
I suspect that there are some athletes who would smoke banana peel if they thought it was performance-enhancing, and that if it was rumored that athletes were using banana peel, WADA would begin to test for it. I also suspect that I am dating myself here.
It kind of sound to me like AFLD is taking a shot in the dark here with hopes of at least possibly wounding LA in some way. A vague reference to a “suspicious” finding from the hair tests could be used to generate negative publicity, even possibly an ASO ban. Neither of these actions would be appealable.
Finally, targeting LA to “show he is just another rider” is a contradiction. If he is”just another rider”, why the need for special testing and public announcements?
WADA and UCI do not recognize hair sample testing, although Cyclingnews reports French law permits the practice.
So, why is AFLD taking hair samples from athletes? Because they can??? (Rant asked first and has not gotten a good answer back)
This is a significant element that contributes to the breakdown of a cohesive worldwide anti-doping effort, and if WADA cares about such trivia, then they should be concerned about one of its approved (and most publicity seeking) labs taking a flyer.
While AFLD may be feeling fat, happy, and smug at the moment, how will they feel when labs in other countries take it upon themselves to do additional testing on French athletes at a football (soccer) World Cup, a track & field event, or alpine World Cup? It’s not so far fetched. AFLD has opened the door and set the precedent.
The potential for this sort of nationalistic tit for tat is one of the negative behaviors WADA purported to seek to prevent. I don’t see WADA stepping up to take any steps to prevent it. Big surprise?!?
From: http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?id=news/2009/mar09/mar20news
“The French Anti-Doping Agency (AFLD) surprised Lance Armstrong with an unusual request while performing an out-of-competition test on the Astana racer as he was training on Tuesday in southern France, according to the Associated Press.
It was Armstrong’s 24th anti-doping test since he announced his comeback last fall; however, it was the first one during which a hair sample was requested in addition to the usual blood and urine samples. The World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) and the UCI do not recognise hair sample testing, but French law permits such testing.”
Well, let’s face it: the TdF is cycling’s premier event, the one cycling competition that even many people who otherwise know little about the sport at least know of. UCI lacks the cajones to take on ASO and its minions because of this. What would have happened last summer if UCI said “Fine, run the Tour on your national calendar, but any non-French rider who participates gets his license yanked.”? Would riders skip the Tour or would ASO settled it differences with UCI/WADA? Enquiring minds want to know.
Hair are probably used as screening test and for research purposes, for exemple trying to discover inside effects of known PED, masking agents and so…
They can be used to add clues at some positive cases even if it’s not a direct evidence. That can bring more credibility to a doping case.
Bordry is not only the chief of the WADA representation in France but he is in first the leader of the AntiDoping agencies of french governemnt, and for the latter role, he has a political mission, so he has to explain the goals of France.
For me in the current case, it was a clear sign sent to UCI “we will not tolerate cover up of positive cases as you have done in the past, we can act by our own”. It’s an indirect reponse to McQuaid’s statement that no top riders will test positive in 2009.
If Bordry or AFLD have spoken after Armstrong’s test that is very probably on the request of reporters. Reporters have learn that Armstrong had been tested, maybe because they were at Armstrong’s hotel or because they have read it on twitter.
Armstrong has just to be tested like other athlete on french soils. Nothing more. Why should he have a “king” regim to not be suggest to the same rules as others?
William,
TDF is 70-80% of cycling, the third or 4th world sport event! France, Italia, Spain, and Begium are together… UCI is nothing without them. Without the money of procycling, McQuaid would have to leave Switzerland, to travel by bus a,d to use third class of hotel… McQuaid and UCI have to respect EU laws too.
The correct response for Bordry if/when asked by the press about the recent testing of Armstrong should have been something to the effect of “I have no comment” or “I’m sorry, that information is confidential and the WADA/AFLD code does not permit me to comment”.
A reporter’s request does not trump the code that AFLD is bound by as a WADA approved lab. WADA code allows Armstrong to twitter away. It does not allow AFLD to broadcast confidential information because they are offended/infuriated Armstrong is within his right to twitter about the testing. Doing it right is sometimes just tough luck and what a professional does to act professional. AFLD is bush league, even judged by WADA World standards.
The current anti-doping system is a “do as I say, not as I do” system and it doesn’t wash. If the system is to be more than political cover with occasionally some actual science taking place as a byproduct/afterthought, then it needs to be accountable.
· Test the testers. Let’s see what kinds of substances they might be using that have the potential to affect their performance on the job. (Let’s “do as I say and as I do”)
· Test the spokespersons. Let’s also see what kinds of substances they might be using that have the potential to affect their performance on the job. (Let’s “do as I say and as I do”)
· Bio Passports for all of the above, prior to implementation on the athletes. (Let’s “do as I say and as I do”)
· Implement penalties on officials, that are similarly as harsh as those meted out to athletes, of violations of the WADA Code. (Let’s “do as I say and as I do”)
· Give athletes the right to appeal decisions to penalize or not penalize officials for misconduct, as officials currently have with the athletes. (Let’s “do as I say and as I do”)
· Have the pool of arbitrators be made up of at least two thirds, selections of the athletes, wrt those who will act as judge on appeals of decisions to penalize/not penalize officials for misconduct. (Let’s “do as I say and as I do”)
· Subject their testing methods to peer review.
· Make full document packages available to accused athletes, upon request. (Said document packages should be so correct, robust, and contain information that would enable the repeatability of the tests, such that there would be little to no question about the reported results…..)
These are just for starters for the IOC arse covering WADA and its AFLD affiliate …..
AFLD blundered into further elevating Armstrong as being more than just any other rider/athlete. Armstrong might ethically owe them some money for acting as his publicist? Then again, AFLD may ethically owe Armstrong some compensation for being a poor barber and the bad haircut? Why did Bordry lie/embellish the truth about knowing where Armstrong was located in France? Is he not familiar with the whereabouts system?
Does Jean C contend, in his last paragraph, that cycling is something of a bus ride vs the jet set without France and the TdF? I’ll grant you it’s a country that contains much beauty. The TdF could be better if it were not embroiled in political grab for power in the cycling world, afraid of the eventual diminishment of its brand should bike racing become more successfully globalized, or come to grips with the fact that French cycling is currently not in a position to produce a contender for GC at its Grand Tour in the foreseeable future unless the race is truly nationalized and only French riders are permitted, no matter how even the playing field is wrt anti-doping. I’d say the days of the TdF’s place atop the bike racing world may be numbered and another race may supplant it in my lifetime? The promised spectacle of the 100th Giro has the potential to come close this year.
Just my rant for the day……
Jeff,
You must learn more about WADA before making your statement, you would be not so far of reality and real rules. For example, AFLD has no access to whereabouts of foreign athletes. UCI has all whrereabouts of riders and can request AFLD to test riders.
If Bordry has lied, he will never beat the Armstrong’s lies!
Within a few months France can have a GC contender, they just have to meet Dr. Ferrari. Just have a look to Armstrong’s results before Ferrari.
You are reading too much Armstrong’s words, his problems with French began when he said he had no TUE (and has a positive test cleared by the famous backdated TUE) so it was BEFORE he won his first TDF, so we could not be jealous of his future win. Just usual spin of Lance. Don’t forget that the most popular french rider is not Anquetil or Hinault but Poulidor who never won a TDF. Coubertain’ words are still ours.
AFLD does have access to the whereabouts system and actively tracks non-French athletes when they are in France. (But let’s play out the fantasy and pretend you are right. In that case go to Rant’s more recent thread and follow the advise contained in the second post)
Bordry did lie. Did your mother never teach you two wrongs don’t make a right? Your reference to Armstrong lying is too general to coment upon. Be more specific.(Everyone lies, it’s all a matter of degree)
Bringing Ferrari in is not relevant to the discussion but I’ll bite. Armstrong’s results were excellent pre and post Ferrari, as they were pre and post cancer. There have been french riders who have worked with Ferrari. Didn’t make much difference on Tdf GC. Still Ferrari makes nice sounding engines. Equally as relevant as you bringing the good Dr. with no proof Armstron doped-assuming that is your position. Poor hapless AFLD wasn’t able to catch your alleged dirty doper LA after he took the GC prize in seven of France’s Grand Tours. Speaks volumes to their skill/professionalism. (Keystone cops)
Anyway, with the current crop of French racers, giving Ferrari free reign and an unlimited budget would help little. Better to convert some football players or ski racers?
I love Anquetil and Hinault. Over the past few years I’ve come to understand why Hinault disliked Lemond so much.
Jean C
From: http://uk.eurosport.yahoo.com/06032009/3/uci-agrees-new-french-anti-doping-collaboration.html
“According to the agreement signed on Friday, AFLD has retained its role in testing and analysis and has also been granted the power to actively target cyclists which it suspects of doping offences.”
This is from a report about UCI/AFLD collaboration wrt testing at Paris-Nice 2009, and to be re-evaluated, but presumed continued post Paris-Nice 2009. The ability to “actively target cyclists which it (AFLD) suspects of doping offences” goes hand in hand with the whereabouts system.
If you disagree, let’s see a cite that supports your contention.