I’ll take mine barbecued with hickory and mesquite, thank you very much. As one of the more vocal defenders of Floyd Landis during his battle to clear his name of charges that he doped during the 2006 Tour, the CyclingNews.com article that Jeff and Old Runner Guy pointed out last night came as a shocker.
Cyclingnews.com has been sent a letter purportedly from Floyd Landis to a senior cycling official with revelations of drug use in cycling in the period up to his Tour de France victory. We are awaiting responses from individuals involved and hope to bring you full details shortly.
But CyclingNews.com merely hinted at what was to come. Of course, the hint was pretty clear. Landis would be pointing the proverbial finger at American cycling’s 800-pound gorilla, in the form of Lance Armstrong. It did not provide a clue — directly — that Landis admitted to doping, even during the 2006 season and the 2006 Tour de France. The Wall Street Journal may have provided the first real clues as to what was happening.
Perhaps the most informed story, though, comes from the indefatigable Bonnie D. Ford, one of the most connected cycling journalists I know. She got the real scoop, directly from the horse’s mouth. But before we get to Floyd, the UCI’s Pat McQuaid asks the obvious question.
“What’s his agenda?” McQuaid said.
McQuaid goes on to speculate:
“The guy is seeking revenge. It’s sad, it’s sad for cycling. It’s obvious he does hold a grudge.”
Is he? Or could there be a simpler reason, like not wanting to live with the torment of covering up lies and untruths? So, let’s hear from Floyd. Landis told Bonnie Ford:
“I want to clear my conscience,” Landis said. “I don’t want to be part of the problem any more.
“With the benefit of hindsight and a somewhat different perspective, I made some misjudgments. And of course, I can sit here and say all day long, ‘If I could do it again I’d do something different,’ but I just don’t have that choice.”
Meanwhile, as Ford tells us, Landis takes full responsibility for what he did. No one forced him. No one threatened him. No one held a gun to his head and said, “Dope, or else the cyclist gets it.”
The hard question to answer, of course, is, “Do you feel guilty about what you did?”
“I don’t feel guilty at all about having doped,” Landis told ESPN.com. “I did what I did because that’s what we [cyclists] did and it was a choice I had to make after 10 years or 12 years of hard work to get there, and that was a decision I had to make to make the next step. My choices were, do it and see if I can win, or don’t do it and I tell people I just don’t want to do that, and I decided to do it.”
For the full scoop, read Bonnie’s story. She provides the full background and details of Landis’ story.
Reaction
No word, yet, on what Greg LeMond’s thoughts on the revelations are (though one would suspect he will feel vindicated).
Update: Here’s a statement by LeMond from his web site:
I believe most of Floyd Landis’s statements regarding the systemic corruption in professional cycling. I imagine from my own experiences that today he is paying a heavy price for his honesty and I support Floyd in his attempt to free himself from his past. I hope that others- fans, riders and sponsor’s [sic] embrace this as an opportunity to bring about positive change in the sport.
Joe Papp sent an email early this morning, which said:
Good to see Floyd clearing his conscience. I support him unequivocally at this juncture.
He also told the New York Daily News:
“What he’s doing takes a lot of courage,” said Joe Papp, a former cyclist who was himself banned for doping and later testified against Landis in an arbitration hearing.
“I think it’s pretty clear that it calls into question Lance Armstrong’s credibility…I don’t think Lance Armstrong or the Lance Armstrong myth will ever be the same.”
Papp’s statement on his blog includes this:
The culture of doping is so pervasive in our sport that it encourages good people to do bad things. But Floyd is now doing the right thing…
That, in a nutshell, says it all, doesn’t it?
And we all know what Pat McQuaid thinks, as related above. McQuaid also told The New York Times:
“I think Landis is in a very sad situation and I feel sorry for the guy because I don’t accept anything he says as true,” McQuaid said in a telephone interview on Thursday. “This is a guy who has been condemned in court, who has stood up in court and stated that he never saw any doping in cycling. He’s written a book saying he won the Tour de France clean. Where does that leave his credibility? He has an agenda and is obviously out to seek revenge.”
Me, I’m stunned. Not that it wasn’t possible — doping has long been, well, almost a tradition in cycling. Landis steadfastly maintained his innocence. Up to now. Perhaps my wife’s reaction best sums it up:
“How could he?”
Good question. Now that he’s admitted to doping — even during the 2006 Tour — and said he doesn’t feel guilty about the choice, is his credibility shot? Or is it enhanced? I guess credibility is all in the eyes of the beholder. Those who maintain that all cyclists dope will take this as further proof. Hard to deny that point of view right now.
For anyone who comes along in the future who might truthfully proclaim that he or she is the victim of a false positive, this will add to the bludgeon that is the critique, “They all deny it. They’re all guilty.”
For many of us, those who believed what he said, looked at the evidence, saw flaws in what was presented, and believed he wasn’t guilty — at least of what he was charged with — the news that he was using other products during the 2006 Tour is a sucker punch to the soul. Many who believed Landis then may never believe another word he says or writes.
And given the years of denial, it’s hard to blame them. How could Floyd protest his innocence, knowing full well that he’d been doping. And knowing full well that though he’d been caught, it wasn’t for the things he claims to have used in 2006. There are a lot of people who will be mad, who will feel cheated, who will question “Why now?” Indeed. Why didn’t he take Pat McQuaid’s ever more sage advice back in 2006. Cop to the accusation, do the time, come back. Save your money. You’ll get a new job and be riding again in no time.
And, of course, that would have perhaps covered up culpability in certain quarters, too. We’ll see where all of this leads. It’s going to be ugly, and it’s probably going to get uglier for a while. Word has it that Johan Bruyneel and Lance Armstrong will be holding a press conference prior to the start of today’s Tour of California stage. O to be a fly on the wall when that goes down.
I can predict what they will say already, and it will echo Andy Rihs’ statement to the Wall Street Journal:
[Through a spokesman, Rihs] said Thursday in a written statement that neither he nor the management of the team “knew that Floyd Landis was doped,” and described the email statements by Mr. Landis as “lies” representing “a last tragic attempt of Landis to once again gain public recognition” that he has lost.
Good on you, Andy, for abandoning your former rider. (That’s sarcasm, folks.) Really? You didn’t have a clue?
I suspect that both Lance and Johan are about to do the same. C’mon, none of them knew? It’s getting harder to believe that, wouldn’t you say?
I can’t exactly say what I feel. Cheated — yeah. Disappointed — a lot. Angry — there’s that too.
And yet, Landis’ case did highlight some problems in the anti-doping system, and in how the tests work. That was enlightening, in a way. The system does need changing. It’s just that we didn’t know something deeper. We didn’t know that Landis was finessing things, and that he actually had been cheating. Just not with testosterone on the day he was caught, to hear him tell it now.
I’ve been hearing from a number of readers and friends. Disappointed, to say the least, to a one. Me, too. I wanted to believe that Landis was actually innocent. But he wasn’t. Not totally.
Coincidentally, I read an article on The New York Times web site yesterday, an op-ed piece called The Technicality Generation, which raises an interesting point about our current state of affairs in this country. The author concludes his piece by saying:
What we know, though, more generally, is much more troubling. Too many members of my generation learned to believe that they could work within the law to evade basic responsibilities, cloaking their actions in idealism. It’s a way of thinking that scars us to this day.
Yes, it does. And it appears that was Floyd’s real argument now. “Technically, I’m clean, because I didn’t use testosterone, like they claim.” It’s a sad morning this morning, for cycling and for Floyd Landis. While he may feel a sense of unburdening at finally telling his story, it’s a tragic story and a tragic fall from grace. Though the fall couldn’t have been prevented, given his actions in the past, it leaves me wondering why he didn’t just own up to it at the beginning. Yes, they may have busted him for the wrong thing, but he was out there doping, just like seemingly everyone else. That he had to make the choice to dope or not to dope, to begin with, is perhaps a greater tragedy. Even with the unburdening, Landis may still be a pariah in the world of cycling for a long time to come.
It’s a shame. We wanted to believe that someone could come back from a hip injury and, based on sheer willpower and determination, win the Tour. The willpower and the determination were there. And a few other things, too, apparently.
I guess the real lesson here is that we shouldn’t put our heroes on pedestals, because they will always turn out to disappoint us. They are, after all, only human. And even the best sometimes make bad choices.
It’s a sad day. Sad, sad, sad.
Hey Rant,
Welcome in the real world.
Great article.
I would disagree with end, it’s a good day for sport like Festina was a good day for French cycling. I hope it could be the same for US and world cycling.
Thanks again to Floyd for coming clean, his live can only be better now. He is more a victim of the system and UCI which is corrupted and need to be reformed.
Nice post Rant…on such a very sad day. I first heard on the news this morning as I was getting ready for work…and have been in quite a funk since. And you are right, I believe this will certainly snowball. Where we go from here is beyond me. Most certainly everybody will now discredit him and deny all…but who do you believe? Is EVERYBODY cheating? have they always been? (everybody who wants a chance to win anyway?) I can’t express my sadness, or the betrayall I feel. I also have been a VERY vocal supporter all these years. Drove for hours to get his book autographed, briefly meet him and shake his hand. I SO believed. And I am now SO crushed. I even donated money to the “Free FLoyd” fund.
Jean,
Thanks. Ultimately, I do think some good will come out of all this. But that may be a bit down the road. There are the predictable denials, recriminations and who knows what else yet to come.
Matt,
Thanks. Lots of people wanted to believe. And lots of us donated money to help Floyd defend himself. With this, lots of people are probably feeling sheepish (at the very least) about those donations.
Rant,
Thanks for the great article. Like you, I feel a mix of emotions ranging from gutted to angry, as I was also one of Landis’s more vocal supporters on forums here and other places. I’ll get more up on my blog (The Razor’s Edge) later today, but for now, I will say that I feel ya, and it’s a sad day indeed.
This is going to create a lot of turmoil for Floyd and a lot of other people. That’s the only thing I feel very bad about. It’s probably also one of the main reasons Floyd has not been completely honest before now. Sometimes being truthful hurts us and hurts others.
Whether or not telling the truth is the best policy is not always clear. Sometimes you’re damned if you do and damned if you don’t.
The only thing I know right now is no, Floyd, I don’t want my money back. Literally, that’s all I know today. A pox on all your houses.
Cub,
Good points.
Sean,
Thanks, I’ll be checking out what you have to say when you’ve got a post up.
eightzero,
Like you, I don’t want the money back. That’s one thing I know for sure.
Big props to Floyd Landis for coming forward with this confession.
Speaking for myself, I always wanted to support Landis. But the outright lies and the propaganda campaign against any person or organization in his way was unjust and indefensible. So it’s not surprising that those who believed in him feel angry.
By coming clean and speaking clearly, Landis is demonstrating the courage and inner strength that befits a champion. I hope that those who supported him in the past will support him now as he tries to do the right thing.
This is a good day for cycling, and a good day for Landis.
The only thing I want from Floyd PIECE OF SHIT Landis is MY MONEY BACK.
He is far, FAR worse than all the other dopers as he TOOK MONEY from people who believed in his innocence. Yeah, yeah, caveat emptor, don’t care, I WANT MY MONEY BACK or his ass in PRISON.
And please, PLEASE, spare me the “sadness” for poor, pitiful Floyd. HAH! He deserves the Hell he’s been living the past 4 years. if he had just confessed after the Tour! It would have been heartbreaking for his fans, me included, but it would have spared him, his family, friends, ALL of us, the FARCE of the past 4 years. That & that Floyd commited FRAUD by taking money from his fans for his “defense”. To take that money when he KNEW he cheated is stunning in its arrogance & conceit.
And ‘SHEEPISH’ does not BEGIN to describe what *I’M* feeling. I want a class-action LAWSUIT. And then I never want to see/hear/read about this LYING, CHEATING PIECE OF SHIT again.
I don’t think any of this conversation is going to go away for quite some time – shocking details (at least to me) from CyclingNews.com:
“I was instructed to go to Lance’s place by Johan Bruyneel and get some EPO from him,” read the e-mail, which Johnson forwarded to United States Anti-Doping Agency officials on May 1. “The first EPO I ever used was then handed to me in the entry way to his building in full view of his then wife.
“It was Eprex by brand and it came in six pre measured syringes,” it continued. “I used it intravenously for several weeks before the next blood draw and had no problems with the tests during the Vuelta.”
Landis also claims in the e-mail that Armstrong had told him Bruyneel met with the International Cycling Union to ensure details of a positive test remained confidential due to a “financial agreement”.
Current UCI president Pat McQuaid was quick to deny that the international federation had accepted funds to conceal information about a positive test when contacted by Cyclingnews. “It’s completely false and completely untrue and we’ve made contact with a lawyer and will take appropriate action,” said McQuaid.
Neither Johnson nor Landis could be contacted at time of publishing.
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/landis-confesses-to-doping-implicates-armstrong-and-bruyneel
http://shlabotnik.com/
Anybody got a nickel I can have?
Hello Rant:
Keep your chin up and keep ranting. There is no shame in standing by your principles to the very end, supporting someone you believe was innocent.
I do feel for you, Strbuk, TBV, and about 90% of hosts you have linked on the left, but all is not wasted effort. Where else could I go to read ideas from others who have the common belief of innocent until proven otherwise?
Keep writing and I will keep reading.
Peter (PEM)
Readers of Rant,
I want to say up front that I’ve been a longtime Floyd supporter. I contributed to the FFF, and regardless of Floyd admitting he doped during his career, I’m more than satisfied that my dollars were well spent. I have not been duped by Floyd or the FFF, and wouldn’t begin to entertain a request for a refund, even if he were financially able.
I’ve been accused of being blind, a fanboy, and worse (still not sure there is anything worse than being a fanboy?), but the accusations never fit. As for the blind part, I was never naive enough to believe doping doesn’t happen in sport and certainly couldn’t possibly be surprised about doping the the professional road peloton. I held out some measured hope that Floyd had not doped, but argued on more than one occasion, that the issue had become largely irrelevant to me compared to, what I consider to be, the more important issues of corruption in UCI, WADA, IoC, as they relate particularly to cycling, but other sports as well. Floyd provided the instrument by which many were able to discover a multitude of failures and corrupt practices within the WADA/USADA/UCI anti-doping and adjudication system.
My initial reaction to the confession, and some of the associated details, was that I had some qualms with what he is currently doing as it relates to the informer/rat vs. witness matrix. However, I’ve come around to the notion that a man can only be expected to take so much, when he’s hung out to dry. I’m going to venture into uncomfortable territory and agree with Jean C that there is an element of Floyd being “a victim of the system and UCI which is corrupted and need to be reformed”. I’d say the UCI is beyond reform, needs to be abolished and reinvented with completely different leadership. Same holds true for IoC and WADA.
There are no white hats here. Floyd has now taken responsibility for his bad acts. Good for him for coming forward with first hand information. As for those who have made the news for interjecting themselves in the story while having no direct knowledge (LeMond, Papp, B Andreau), this doesn’t absolve them for their irrelevance. It certainly doesn’t absolve the UCI, WADA, USADA, USA Cycling, or LNDD/AFLD. It will be interesting to see if any of the regulatory organizations take responsibility for their shortcomings. The implicated riders/teams will need to have their say. At least one team owner has made an initial response. Others will in due course.
Floyd’s admissions and accusations will result in an massive upset to professional road cycling and a good number of riders and teams. Don’t bet on new sponsors breaking down the doors to get in on the game anytime soon. I harp about the unjust and corrupt system employed by sporting regulators. Some young, and purportedly clean riders, will rail on about the injustice done to them and their sport by these senior riders who have abused PED’s and brought the sport into disrepute, while forgetting they are the ones who put on the show that made the sport a paying proposition for the current generation, in the first place. If they want justice, they should talk to a bunch of Louisiana fishermen along the Gulf of Mexico. Better yet, make like Dr. Dolittle and have a conversation with the fish, shrimp, oysters, and crabs from the Gulf. Please excuse me for not getting overly worked up about the plight of professional road racing. There are just more important issues in the world.
I feel a little disappointed and sad. Overall, I’m not sure how much my feelings have changed. I didn’t send money, but I defended him. Though I knew the possibility he took something existed, I didn’t feel that they proved he did.
I still find WADA and others lacking. They way they handle things seems arbitrary. In my opinion they use a lot of info for publicity for themselves and they don’t have transparency. These things haven’t changed. And I find Pat McQuaid’s statements odd considering things he’s said in the past.
So Jeff, would you like to buy a ‘Free Floyd’ t-shirt, hat & 2 signed posters? How much would you give me?
And if Floyd doesn’t have the cash on hand to pay me back, NO problem; I’ve got a bunch of work I need done on my house. And hey, he can even pretend he’s still a cyclist, as he can work off the DEBT faster if he takes a PERFORMANCE ENHANCER.
susie b,
Sorry about your buyers remorse. That’s life. How much are you asking for the swag? I don’t need any new t-shirts or posters, but they could be interesting. Good luck with the housework.
Rant, tbv, 8-zero, others – I was an active participant on the TBV website back in the day when all this was going on (under the name Bostonlondontokyo.) I recall so many stages of the process, the hearing(s), the decision(s), Floyd’s legal camp and their activities, the book publication, etc. I was most interested in the debating that went on back and forth about the veracity of the scientific findings vis a vis Landis’ testing results. I think the loudest discussions centered around legal points and scientific points. Whether that’s ironic now or not is sort of ‘out of scope’. It was all interesting to read about.
I do recall that I got a bit of a ‘talking to’ when I raised questions about Floyd’s behavior, or trustworthiness, or accuracy, etc. Looking back, I can understand that when someone has set his or her mind to strong belief in someone’s innocence, it’s nearly impossible to present a counter-argument that would actually change that person’s mind.
I took the news with a bit of shock today because I think TBV and Rant and some others had at least put a spark of doubt in my mind about Floyd’s guilt. I was never fully convinced that he had ever doped, there was always that small bit of doubt. So, I took in the information and just kind of mused over it for a while… it was then that I remembered his book, ‘Positively False’, that I really started to feel sad. Then I thought about the Floyd Landis legal defense fund, and felt even sadder, and even a bit angry. I was thinking of all those people who bought the book, read it, gave money to his defense fund. I don’t know how it is that this man was able to carry on this lie for so long… Yes, I actually do feel very sorry for Landis because this must have been the worst kind of guilt to live with… to dupe people out of money to support a legal case that was essentially (now) nothing more than arguing technicalities, well, it’s beyond sad. If he had any conscience at all, he would make an attempt to refund some of that money to people who’d supported him. That might help to clear his conscience. To quote Morrissey, ‘And it corrodes my soul, I want to leave…’
Yes, I can understand how Landis may have been in very deep over his head, been carried away with the sweep of the tide. There’s even an argument that he may have rationalized what happened by saying ‘everyone does this and so my win is fair.’
All in all, it doesn’t matter – it’s hard to imagine cycling as a professional sport having much respect anymore. Landis’ confession strongly implies that one cannot win the TDF without doping. That’s the take-away I get from his statements.
My very, very humble advice to Landis is that he should get a part time job, pull out that list of contributors to his fund (the one that he was asked to keep for legal purposes), and slowly but surely credit back the money to his supporters. His book profits, I’d say he can keep those – buyers did get ‘something’ for their money. I think he’ll feel a lot better when that’s out of the way.
It will be interesting to see if any other former cyclists, especially former Postal/Discovery/Astana riders, come out and confirm some of what Floyd is now saying. I don’t think it will happen. It would take a lot of courage, especially if they wait a few days and witness how Floyd is going to get raked over the coals by those with something to hide.
That’s assuming Floyd is telling the truth now. I’m making that assumption, but I could be wrong.
Landis has to say that he didn’t take testosterone: Otherwise, it is (likely) perjury, and he faces possible jail time. It is ludicrous to think that he took everything else (including testosterone) at various points…but just not testo. during that particular tour. It is a self-serving statement, which casts at least a little bit of doubt on his “coming clean” motives.
But the fact is that you (Rant) and a bunch of others beat up on guys like Lemond, Papp, etc. all because you somewhat blindly believed Landis: Everything Lemond and Papp said was true.
I was glad to see the headline of this post. Like someone said in a previous post: “Welcome to the real world”.
Why spin this so that it looks like courage or character? It’s none of those things.
The guy is a thief, a liar and a con man. He grifted 2 million dollars out of the Floyd Fairness Fund using dupes to do his work, his first book was a grift, and his next book will be a grift. That he grifted to pay off his debt is irrelevant.
If he had chosen not to be a con man in the first place, his words now might carry weight. At this point though I don’t know how to believe anything he says. He’s lied for years and years and years — he’s sacrificed everything in his life and a lot in other peoples’ lives to serve the lie and his personal myth. He’s mimed self-righteousness and martyrdom on a grand scale.
Now he’s “clean” or “courageous”? Actually, he’s probably a sociopath.
A question to the former (?) Landis supporters: Landis has, in his admission about doping, brought in 3 other riders and a coach as also having been complicit with doping: One of Landis’ biggest complaints in the initial stages of the crisis was that information about his test results had been ‘leaked’ to the press. Hasn’t he done the same thing here, leaking information about others to the press? And based on what proof? Thoughts?
Stephan,
How many ‘mea culpas’ would you like? 😉
Mark,
The truly courageous thing would have been to admit it from the start. Having chosen the course he did, changing direction and coming clean — even at this late date — is better than nothing. It’s still the right thing to do.
uxbunny,
From what I saw on a chat with Neil Browne over at Versus.com, it appears that the news of the letter was leaked by someone connected with whatever is going on behind the scenes. Not sure who, but based on what Neil said, it appears Landis may have been caught somewhat off guard by the story coming out when it did.
That said, if Landis wasn’t the one who leaked the information, we might also want to ask the question, “What does the leaker get from putting this information into the public’s hands at this point in time?”
from a neil browne interview on Vs.com:
http://www.versus.com/blogs/2010-cycling-events/cycling-landis-advance/
“According to Landis, the original purpose of the leaked e-mail was to admit to doping and to demonstrate to the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency (USADA) how drug doping was accomplished without detection. Landis claims he included others because he was trying to negotiate amnesty for himself and the riders named before supplying the dopers’ regimen to USADA.
Talking about the leaked e-mail, Landis said, “I would have preferred that it had stayed private and the result of me coming clean (with this information) would be for the purpose of better doping controls so future generations of riders would not have to make the same decisions I had to make.”
assuming that’s true, landis didn’t intend to leak the information to the press. all appropriate caveats apply, of course. For my own sake, as a [possibly former depending on the issue] landis supporter, I would say there are still legitimate problems with how PED use is policed. and I still think the actual data provided in landis’ case wasn’t good. Ironically, landis was probably indignant and convinced of his case, because he knew what he did. In much the same way that truly innocent people don’t have alibis, clean cyclists probably don’t have really precise knowledge of their blood and hormone levels. after all, why would they need to?
Brian,
Thanks for the link. I just finished reading that article about a minute ago.
I am not sure that, other than on a personal basis for some of us, that this is a sad day. It might be a day which becomes the start of some ugly things going on. People that Landis has implicated, either directly or indirectly, will make denials, as several already have. There may be others that see Landis’ revelations as confirmation of what they say has gone on. It is possible that teammates of Landis, particularly those who are retired, might confirm at least some of his accusations. But then there is the point that now his story has changed and which one are we to believe?
On reflection, I don’t see to much happening from WADA, UCI, etc. regarding what has gone on in the past, at least not based simply on Landis’ statements. There is no hard evidence to corroborate what he has said regarding Armstrong, etc. Maybe if others are willing to step forward, but only time will tell. The accusation of bribery might possibly be corroborated by a money trail, but a one time bribe, probably paid in cash, might be pretty hard to trace.
Does Landis have any detailed information on doping strategies which could help in catching other PED users? He probably didn’t know about any scientific details; his knowledge was most likely of the sort of “do it this way and they won’t catch you”. Possibly some of this type of thing might be of help. Then there is the possibility that things they were doing in the early 2000’s are out of date now.
It seems that almost every one caught using PEDs sooner or later says “everybody was doing it.” At times, that sort of sounds to me like the typical teenage excuse, maybe where’s there’s smoke there’s fire. But then I don’t think that there is anyone who can state from personal, first hand knowledge, whether or not everyone in the pro ranks doped or doped in the past, anymore than I think there is anyone who can state from personal firsthand knowledge whether or not all teenagers smoke weed, drink, sext, or whatever.
“Courageous” is the LAST thing to call Floyd-Piece of Shit-Landis. And “right thing”? By trying to take down ALL of American cycling with him? You can’t be serious. He’s just a bitter, angry guy whose life has turned to crap because he got caught for what many others (most?) at that level were doing in the sport. They kept competing & living their lives while he lost everything.
And apparently, he’s been threatening Lance for months about his allegations. Looking for a pay-off to keep quiet?
And WHO exactly instigated that call to LeMond during the hearing? Wonder if some of MY money went to his ex-manager as a pay-off to take the heat & keep quiet. I now believe Floyd capable of ANYthing.
The doping & lying is bad enough but Floyd Landis STOLE MONEY from his suckered believers. He’s no better than Madoff except in scale.
Bur hey, at least none of us are/were one of his “best friends” now being called a doper. So, DZ, do YOU feel “sad” for poor Floyd?
And Jeff – for $625 plus shipping, it can ALL be yours!
Rant,
Did you ever dream that we would see this day?
I have been thinking about you, and TBV, and Arnie Baker, who spent so much of his own time and money on those Town Hall visits across the country explaining lab forms to us. Mostly I think about Floyd’s mother. I only ever saw her in a photograph cutting a cake when Floyd won the Tour, and then she was quoted in the press mightily defending her son. She struck me as a sweet but strong woman full of faith. My heart goes out to her and her family as all this horrid stuff is being raked up again. They do not deserve the treatment they may well receive because of Floyd’s admission.
Yes, I feel like I have been made a fool, defending Floyd to all my friends all these years. It would have been bad enough had he admitted guilt early on, but to lie to his family and friends and then accept money and other help in his defense…it makes my head swim. But the cherry on top of this spinach sundae is why he would name names with no proof, including Dave Z, his friend who stuck by him all this time. His own credibility is shot, and as of today he has now lost the only real friends he had, so why lob accusations at people when you have no proof and no one is going to believe you? Even if Lance is doped up to the eyeballs, it would have been better to stay quiet and let the wheels of justice run their course. Because as we have found out today, they always will, even if it takes longer than we think it should.
I can sure understand your anger, Susie. With these revelations, the whole situation has been inverted. And Floyd has definitely shot his own credibility in the foot (or elsewhere, depending on your point of view). Lots of people will doubtless never believe another thing he says. Too bad he didn’t choose to own up at the beginning of this mess.
Debby,
I never would have predicted this in a million years. I feel for Floyd’s family. They got thrown into this tornado by happenstance. I’m disappointed, and that is typical “Rant” understatement.
susie b,
I’m not in the market for those items today and wasn’t ~2007 either, but $625 plus shipping seems a bit over market price right now. We can all dream big. There was an element of risk in your purchases. I can understand a certain level of disappointment, but the volume of your anger seems disproportionate. My advise, FWLIW, is to become empowered instead of acting the victim and to chalk it up to a learning experience. We’re all affected by deception every day. On the grand scale of things and with recent national/global events in mind, $625 is getting off cheap.
After careful consideration for a few hours, I can now safely conclude this:
1. I do not know the Truth, it is likely I never will know the Truth…and fairly, it is no longer particularly important to me that I know the Truth.
2. Floyd Landis may be very ill, and not know it. He too may not be able to distinguish the Truth.
3. I miss strbuk.
Well, Jeff – that’s what I “paid”. And absolutely, I want to be EMPOWERED by SUING HIS FREAKIN ASS.
As far as I’m concerned, he STOLE from ME. And every other SUCKER dumb enough to believe him.
And one of my biggest ‘learning experiences’ from this little debacle is finding out some people mindnumbingly just want to feel “SAD” for the “poor” guy. ARE YOU KIDDING ME?
He is a CHEAT, a LIAR, a FRAUD, but most especially, a CROOK.
And you know what, it’s MY anger. Not yours. Whether the rest of the previous Floyd “supporters” feel the same way, I could care less. Pretty much how Floyd did NOT CARE that he was TAKING MONEY to help defend him when he WAS GUILTY. And whether he did or did not take testosterone before that stage or in that Tour when he’s confessed to taking a different PED, does NOT MATTER.
He CROSSED a line. He NEEDS to PAY.
Maybe he’ll share a PRISON CELL with Barry Bonds. They deserve each other.
WS says
“It seems that almost every one caught using PEDs sooner or later says “everybody was doing it.” ”
We’ve had this discussion before, and I realize you look at this from a lawyer’s perspective, so you want hard factual evidence before being convinced etc.
But I’ve been convinced for years that the whistle blowers are telling the truth. There’s not enough accumulated evidence, perhaps, to boot out every doping enabler, but there is plenty. It’s mainly the confluence of several factors that creates a picture where there is no other sensible explanation except that doping is widespread and omerta is universal.
1) the overwhelming evidence based on the science that oxygen-vector doping conveys a decisive advantage
2) the overwhelming circumstantial evidence from both doping scandals and whistleblower testimony that every major cyclist since as far back as Lemond (at least) has been involved in doping
3) that cyclists as a whole act as if there is an omerta and act as if doping and covering it up is the only way to practice the sport
4) the persistence of doping DSes, doping docs, prominent doper riders, and doping enablers at every level of the sport.
The evidence is overwhelming William. Floyd is, finally, telling the truth. Maybe now your perspective might have shifted sufficiently and your knowledge of cycling might be sufficient to take a 2nd look.
Susie,
There were plenty of people out there with credentials and evidence casting doubt on Landis’ story. Landis’ defense and story (inspired by Howard Jacobs or someone of his like no doubt) were ridiculous lies from the start….this is why he lost the support of cycling fans and became alienated from pro cycling. Patient souls like JeanC did their best to come on to web sites like this and calmly explain why Landis couldn’t be telling the truth, but people didn’t listen.
Hell, the reason I took an interest in this myself was outrage over Landis conning people like you…ie well meaning people like WilliamSchart wandering onto DPForums and making silly naive arguments, seemingly in good faith, about how Landis couldn’t be lying etc. It seemed like omerta was taking a whole new ugly form that required outright fraud and propaganda sites like TBV to prop up the myths. TBV (and Rant) should be strongly criticized for their biased approach, even if their intentions were perfectly pure and innocent. But it’s not like there weren’t people on these web sites pointing out their errors time and again.
So in short, everyone who contributed to FFF had been told what the score was–they chose to believe because they wanted to believe.
2 questions. If Floyd is telling the truth, then how is he different than any other cyclist making money off the sport and claiming they are clean? If you were willing to believe in the guy while the world called him a liar, why not support him now that he’s trying to do the right thing in good faith?
Ludwig:
I am not a lawyer, more of a social scientist. I agree that I look more to hard evidence rather than hearsay and circumstantial evidence. From hear in Mid Missouri I have little way of knowing what every rider in professional cycling is doing. I couldn’t even say for a fact that every rider rides his bike every day. Probably does, but how do I know.
Hmm…srry double post, thought the 1st one was lost.
But bottom line I want to reiterate that what Floyd is doing right now DOES take a lot of guts. Standing up to Pharmstrong and the full force of omerta is not easy.
Ludwig – Floyd committed FRAUD by soliciting & accepting that money for what he is now revealing was a LIE. He CHEATED. You really don’t see the difference?
And not that it makes any difference now, but I did not give the money just because I “believed him” (although that was part). Like many here, I spent months reading all the scientific types debate his test data. And insanely then watched HOURS of that excruciatingly BORING Hearing. And came to the INCORRECT conclusion that the lab made errors. Apparently, all doping test data are just like statistics – lies, lies, & DAMN lies.
I no longer give a flying fart about Floyd Piece of Shit Landis EXCEPT I want my money back or his ass in prison.
I do, unfortunately it seems at this point, still care about this sport & most especially the American riders I have followed & admired for years. Knowing that the next 2 and a half months before & thru the Tour will now be filled with THIS crap is what makes ME “sad”. And angry.
What susie b said. She is the only person in the comments who is making any sense to me. Susie, if you’re ever in LA, I will buy you a friendly drink.
I don’t know if Landis is a POS, like susie says.. He may be a profoundly sick individual. But it’s hard to overestimate the amount of damage he’s caused.
Landis belongs in prison. I’m not sure he’s committed a crime (please don’t ask me to provide any more legal analysis on the topic of Floyd Landis), but if Landis’ raising of who knows how much through the FFF is not a crime, it should be.
Also, it’s obvious that Floyd is a liar — either he was lying before, or he’s lying now. He’s probably lying every time he moves his lips, but who really knows?
There IS the fact that Floyd destroyed his own life in this process. He bankrupted himself and threw his life down the toilet.
I haven’t read through everything yet. Has Landis apologized for defrauding thousands of people out of millions of dollars? If not, then he has not come clean.
Should I join Rant in eating crow? I don’t know … did I ever say that Floyd was innocent? There are so many thousands of pages of my thoughts about Floyd … but I don’t think I ever proclaimed him innocent. I probably DID say things I now wish I could take back … like that Floyd was gutty or courageous, or that I was grateful for his fight against the anti-doping authorities. OK … Rant, if you have room at your table, I’ll help you polish off what’s left of that crow.
Mostly, I think I argued that the ADAs never proved that Floyd had doped. I still believe that.
But I’m also coming to believe something else. There has to be a reason why the ADAs seem to be right so much of the time. I don’t think that their science is all that good, or that their testing is any better than it was made out to be at the Malibu arbitration. The only reason that I can think of is that there are an awful lot of dopers out there.
This is a sad day. Some future athlete is going to be falsely accused of doping, and thanks to Floyd, no one is going to listen to him.
In conclusion: what susie b said.
susie b & Larry,
If it helps rant and rave on this forum, please, go ahead. Perhaps it’s cathartic for you? And….the forum title gives you an invitation and some license.
As far as the issue of Floyd committing criminal acts, maybe? susie b might spend a few hundred more dollars consulting with a reputable attorney. I’d doubt he/she would recommend attempting any action or provide susie b with much hope of collecting her lost money. It would be interesting to know what percentage of those who gave to the FFF are bitter and want their money back, and what percentage, while perhaps a bit put off, are basically satisfied that their money went to exposing some of the less seemly side of the alphabet soup. (I fall into the latter camp)
Ludwig,
If you want to keep calling it “omerta”, have at it, but be aware the word is inappropriate both for its lack of accuracy and because it is an out an out slur toward persons of a certain ethnic background. YMMV.
On early blush, I’ll have to agree with you regarding the notion that what Floyd is currently doing is quite difficult. He has caused a level of embarrassment to his family, friends, and supporters. He’s disappointed some and flat out angered many others. If he is now striving to tell as much of the truth as he knows, and my gut reaction (sometimes right / sometimes wrong / usually correct) is that he’s laying the truth on the line, consequences be damned. It’s an uphill battle with little potential material payoff for Floyd. No one named is happy with him. I’m guessing nearly all will deny any knowledge or involvement. However, one or two might have shared the experience Floyd is now describing and may corroborate elements of his story? I wouldn’t discount there being a smoking gun or two either. Still, the UCI, McQuaid, Verbruggen, Bruyneel, Rihs, and LA have a great deal of money, connections, and clout to defend themselves.
Rant readers,
I reject the notion that because Floyd lied so publicly and for so long, that one can never believe anything he has to say now or in the future. If that is the case, there is no logical reason to believe anyone, ever. We are all afflicted with a human frailty whereby we all lie from time to time. It’s a matter of degree. If anyone on this forum claims they have never lied, either we have a candidate for a new deity, or you are not only a liar yourself, but a damned liar. On the other hand, it’s perfectly logical to have a healthy skepticism and to examine his claims carefully, if you care about them at all.
One thing is for certain. This is a very early time in what promises to be an ugly episode for cycling. If what Floyd says is true, it is quite damning for several high profile individuals and for the UCI as an organization.
There is sure to be much more to this story. I’m wondering who leaked the information and what was their rationale, for starters. Stay tuned………
You sum it up well, Rant.
I based a lot of my support for FL on the assumption that, “Nobody’d be low enough to collect donations from me and thousands of others if they weren’t clean, right?”
But he can still earn the $75 he snookered from me, if he unconditionally lays out all the names, dates, and places to catch the other cheaters.
I’ll admit, I’ve done a 180. The fact that Floyd did the media powerpoint tours, the book, the FFFund, duped his parents, etc.. for so long… is just evil. Its evil.. I can’t think of a better definition of evil. That was one of the primary reasons for backing him, based on his appearance/responses, FFF, lab flaws, etc.. I just couldn’t imagine someone could do that.. so I believed him.
I’ve never really believed LA.. but I’ve given him a pass based on the general good things he’s done for the sport, his cancer foundation, etc.. I believed he doped in the past, but was clean for the majority of his tour wins.. Now to hear him deny deny deny and throw Floyd under the bus (which Floyd deserves, but not from Lance).. is a bit.. lets say.. troubling.. I’m changing my opinion on that a bit.. Maybe the Lance bank does need to fail.. no bailout. What an epic fail that would be to cycling and cancer charity. Sad.
On Lemond. Love him from the tour winning days.. but still don’t like him now.. he’s a media whore, any chance he gets.. however!! in one day, he has now taken a higher stature than my former favorite athlete.. LEAPS AND BOUNDS.
On Pat M. Wow.. Listened to the interview.. he’s definitely on team Lance.. Lance, innocent or not.. Pat should NOT have responded to allegations like that..
I’m going to be running and swimming a bit more.. and mountain biking.
Hope DZ comes out and admits, if indeed he used in the past.. Sounds like almost all the other players are denying. Haven’t seen a response from DZ.. Heard Vaughters had made a comment that DZ is not currently doping.. or not doing it now.. something along those lines.. which if true would indeed be admit of former drug use.. I heard that second hand from someone who saw it posted on a forum.. so BAD SOURCING!!
Relieved a bit.. in some sense..
For everyone here who thinks that Floyd is telling the truth: Floyd denies using testosterone at the 2006 Tour. Ludwig, Jean C, Cub: Landis has not “come clean”. Or if he has, then Landis’ supporters were right all along about him: he did not do the doping that he was accused of doing. He used every other dirty doping trick in the book, including testosterone at other points in his racing career, but he did not take testosterone during the 2006 Tour? I suppose that’s possible, but it’s not very likely. The most likely thing is that Landis lied, Landis lies and Landis will continue to lie. I don’t see much to admire here, unless you admire how well Landis lies.
If Landis said that the sun will come up in the morning, then I’d fill every flashlight in my house with fresh batteries.
As for Landis’ trying now to do “the right thing” — where do I start? Even if I believed a word that Landis says — and Landis is a confessed liar of pathological proportion — “the right thing” would be to ‘fess up and take responsibility for what he did wrong. But he is unapologetic about having doped, and he barely recognizes his responsibility for duping thousands of people into believing his lies. He says that he’d like to send the money back to his supporters, but he can’t. That’s no excuse. There are thousands of other ways he might try to make restitution. His off-hand dismissal of his responsibility for what he did to his supporters shows that he has little remorse.
Honestly. If you believe that Floyd was caught doping in 2006, then he’s STILL LYING. Unless Floyd at least tries to make good the wrong he’s done by defrauding thousands, he has not come clean. What exactly is there here that’s worthy of anyone’s admiration?
In conclusion: what susie b said. I’d offer to buy her dinner as well as a drink, if I were a better person.
I won’t begrudge anyone their sense of anger and betrayal. My problem was always with the testosterone charge, and the lack of anything in the decisive oxygen vector. They may have got a guilty guy, but it still feels to me like they did it with the wrong charge.
I wish he’d been honest earlier, and saved everyone a bunch of time. money and energy. Still, I’m inclined to believe most of what he says now. It’ll need substantiation to have real effect because his credibility is in negative numbers for most people. I think he knew that when he hit the ‘send’ button, and hope he’s found some peace with it.
I don’t regret any of my time or energy, or feel like I’ve been made a fool, tool or dupe. Others have freely shared their opinions otherwise. If people didn’t get passionately interested in things, it would be a more boring world. There have been a lot of interesting things learned and great people met, along with with the incoming bricks.
As with Rant, I’m sad that it ends with such a mess, but given the reality, it was either going to end in a mess or a cover up. If Landis prefers the mess, so be it.
TBV
Jeff, I am not ranting. I am giving you my take as I see it. This can’t be cathartic or else I’d feel better. This can’t be ranting or I’d be using more words in all caps, and more words that would probably trigger the WordPress autocensor.
I’m happy to know that you don’t personally feel cheated. However, the question of whether Landis committed fraud does not depend on how you feel, or how Susie feels. It does not depend on taking a poll of the feelings of the people who were (allegedly) defrauded.
As for the question of whether everyone lies … that is a statement of faith on your part. You cannot know objectively that this is an accurate statement. However, I also subscribe to a faith system that teaches me that everyone lies. So we’re in agreement: everyone lies. Here are some things that everyone does not do. Everyone does not lie to millions of people at one time. Everyone does not repeat the same lie over and over for nearly 4 years. Everyone does not print the lies in a book, or come up with a title for the book that essentially says “I Am Telling The Truth”, or use the profits from the book in an effort to perpetuate the lie told in the book. Everyone does not drag their personal religion, or the religion of the liar’s parents and community, into the effort to perpetuate the lie. Everyone does not lie under oath. Everyone does not use the lie as a way to raise money from thousands of trusting souls, and then use the money to perpetuate the lie. Everyone does not lie and then accuse his accusers of lying, of intentional lying, of having their testimony bought, and of being corrupt. Everyone does not lie and then assure his friends and supporters, many of whom worked tirelessly and without pay, that they can believe the lies told by the liar.
Moreover, while my faith (and evidently, your faith) teaches that everyone lies, my faith (and I presume, your faith) has something to say about the process of coming clean. Everyone who lies does not come forward later and say that he’s not sorry for doing the things he lied about. Everyone who lies does not fail to express remorse to all the people he lied to. Everyone who lies does not shrug off any responsibility to right the wrong he committed by lying.
In short, Landis is not a liar in the way I am a liar. Sorry. Landis is a liar on a scale that is difficult to comprehend. Which is why I think you’ve failed so far to comprehend the kind of liar we’re discussing here, for which I do not blame you.
We also have the difficult issue of Landis’ failure to admit that he doped with testosterone in 2006. That’s a difficult statement to believe, but unless you believe it, then Landis is continuing to lie, and is continuing to engage in much of the conduct described by the “everyone does not” statements detailed above.
Finally … do I allow Landis’ lies to erode my faith in Landis’ ability to reform, or in my faith in other athletes, or in people in general? The answer to part of this question is easy. Until Landis fully comes clean, admits to all of his lies, expresses the proper remorse for all of his lies, and makes a good faith effort to make right the wrong he has done, I see no reason why I should believe that he has reformed. As for my faith in others … suffice it to say that one of the great evils of lying (particularly on the scale that Landis lied) is that it DOES act to erode our faith in each other. What percentage of those who contributed to Landis’ “Fairness Fund” (even the name of the fund was a lie) do you think would contribute to a similar fund for a similarly accused athlete? Unless your answer is “100%”, you have a picture of the evil that Landis has done.
ludwig,
No worries, the duplicated post appeared in the Pending queue. I deleted it a couple of hours ago.
TBV,
Well said.
Everyone else,
Great discussion. Keep it going.
Initial volleys have been fired. Damage done on both sides. All disappointed and hurt. Walk a mile in his shoes… And wait for more revelation. Also, how unethical is it that a private email to the CEO of usac is leaked? Another indignity in an epoch of humiliation and subterfuge.
We continue to eat our own.
Rich, here’s the problem. I cannot walk a mile in a man’s shoes that I do not trust. I cannot be certain whose shoes I’m walking in. Did Landis dope with testosterone in 2006, or did he not? Depending on the answer, the shoes are different.
Hey folks, we “meet” again. I’ll try to be brief. Mostly I’m angry. I really don’t like it when people lie. It hurts people. It sucks. People shouldn’t lie. Floyd sucks. That said, I am glad he is taking a big step in clearing his conscience. It is entirely his own friggin fault, but what a terrible burden he has been carrying. Good luck, Floyd.
This is M from TBV,
As the primary one who argued that Landis doped, I’m glad that he finally confessed.
I understood why he lied. Most all of the dopers lied and denied. He had sacrificed and invested so much of himself into his career and his livelihood. Denial was to preserved that and the possibility of working at a high level again. He felt that he was only doing what everyone else was doing. That’s why he could say “I won it fair and square”. But when he testified that he had never ever taken any illicit substance, I knew he was not telling the truth. That was not credible.
He’s reached the bottom of the economic barrel. There is no further point in denial because his career is done. So I can understand why he has come clean now. Although it’s interesting that he purposely confessed before the statute of limitations had run on his earlier doping violations.
He is just a human being trying to make a living, not some pure hero as many of you believed. And I can understand why telling the truth now might help him on his road. There’s a part of me though that wonders whether he has exaggerated some of the tale, because he wants those who were doping with him to go down as well. That’s because I sensed a certain vindictiveness in the way he conducted his legal defense.
I still see a lot of denial here.
M, I remember you. My favorite adversary.
You’re missing two critical points. First, Floyd says that he did not dope with testosterone in 2006. So either he’s still lying, or else Landis’ AAF was a false positive. I’m inclined to believe that he’s still lying, though I can’t know for certain. If he’s still lying, then he has not “come clean”. If he’s telling the truth … well, I’m not sure where that leaves us. The only argument I ever tried to make in our debate was that the ADAs never proved the AAF. If Landis has truly “come clean”, then I took the right side in our debate.
Second point. You’ve fallen into the argument that everyone lies, Floyd lied, Floyd is like everyone, we can understand what Floyd did, poor Floyd. Floyd did not lie like “everyone”. In all likelihood, Floyd’s lies amount to perjury and criminal fraud. There is also something in the way he lied that is truly disgusting. The way he dragged his family and his religion into the discussion … it is hard to forgive. Fortunately for me, I don’t have to forgive Floyd, because he has not apologized to his former supporters, or agreed to make anything remotely resembling restitution.
It is odd to me … so many of Floyd’s former attackers now defend his actions. From my standpoint, Floyd has proven himself to be a liar. Maybe he’s telling the truth now, but he’s done nothing in my book to earn the benefit of the doubt. But I’m glad that you believe him now, more or less. It makes me feel better about the fact that, back in the day, I also believed him, more or less. He’s a very convincing liar. Don’t you think?
I am sorry for all the people who felt betrayed.
As pointed by Ludwig, we have tried to protect you against that kind of deception.
About Testosterone, I don’t believe that Landis didn’t have it inside his body. Maybe he didn’t took it that day, maybe it was inside his blood transfusion or in another pills or maybe he drunk too much whiskey and took T without knowing.
Maybe it’s just an other lie of Landis for some reason.
For me, it’s not important, Landis like everyone he would never be perfect. Since very young, I never put too much faith in humans especially when they arrive at the top, in that position people have too much to lose and their behaviour change often badly to protect their living.
What happened and still happens to Floyd is the result of a collective behaviour, he wanted to escape his positive test and his fans wanted it too giving him more power to try it.
Probably that history would never be the same in Europe since we had our “Landis” with the Virenque, Festina,…
For a long time many people like technicians and anti-doping, Lemond, the “haters”, those lazy French who “refuse now to train hard”, … have been sullied to point or to say the truth about the current state of sport and of the athletes. For us, that is a rehabilitation.
After a such downfall it should be easier to rebuild a better world.
Jean C, I don’t understand your position! Landis said that he did not dope with testosterone during the 2006 Tour, or even during the 2006 season. In other words, Landis has not taken back any of the things he said about the testing being botched, the lab being wrong, the technicians being dishonest, etc., etc.
Yes, he’s admitted that he doped, but the only doping he’s admitted to for the 2006 Tour is HGH. Jean C, if all he was using was HGH, then he’s the dumbest doper of all time. Of course he wasn’t just using HGH. So he’s still lying through his teeth about what happened in 2006. And this does not bother you?
He’s also still saying that your national lab is incompetent and their results were wrong. He said much, much worse about LNDD, as you well remember, and he hasn’t taken any of it back. I can’t understand why this does not bother you. Is it enough for you that he’s confessed to a small portion of what he’s done?
WHOA NELLY!!! From NYTimes article: “Antidoping officials are trying to corroborate the information through interviews with athletes and trainers. They will retest frozen blood and urine samples taken at the time, said people briefed on the matter.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/21/sports/cycling/21cycling.html?pagewanted=2&hpw
Has anyone actually gone over his testimony yet?
Remember, he is saying that he didn’t use testosterone during the 2006 TdF. I think it is to avoid perjuring himself, but I haven’t looked at the complete transcript. If he said “I have never taken PED’s” then he has problems…if he said “I didn’t take testo. during the 2006 TdF” then I guess technically he didn’t perjure himself.
In addition, for those of you here saying he defrauded you out of money for the FFF…I guess the same argument applies(?). He is still claiming that he didn’t take that particular drug during that race.
Personally, I don’t believe that statement, but those are the facts as they exist today.
It looks to me like we are still parsing Landis’ statements according to our own personal beliefs to some extent. Those of us here who believe that everybody doped, or at least that Armstrong and company doped, seem to find corroboration of that belief in his allegations now. But if he has accused one of our favorite riders, then we might think that is lying, and many certainly will question the charges of bribery. Personally, unless he has some hard evidence of his charges, I basically care less. As Armstrong says, its his word against ours. Only time will tell if anything comes of all this. I would probably give credit to his admissions of doping for himself, while taking the proverbial small quantity of NaCl with the rest. And that small quantity is more due to the fact that I would tend to do so with anybody’s allegations rather than any judgement I might have on Landis’ veracity. If doping is as widespread as many think, then there are many liers in the ranks of pro cyclists.
As to the particular charge: that he used testosterone on stage 17, I still have some doubts about the lab results. YMMV. But after all was said and done, I no longer was interested in debating whether or not he was either innocent or whether or not the charges had really been proved. While I retained a little interest in Landis and his attempts to come back, I am more interested now in improving anti-doping efforts. Landis is past history, it’s time to move on.
From the Espn article:
As for his own positive test, Landis still maintains that result was inaccurate and that he had not used synthetic testosterone during the 2006 season — although he now admits he used human growth hormone during that time. At this point, he said he does not want to dwell on any of the issues he and his lawyers hammered at during his case.
“There must be some other explanation, whether it was done wrong or I don’t know what,” he said. “You can try to write it however you want — the problem I have with even bothering to argue it is [that] I have used testosterone in the past and I have used it in other Tours, and it’s going to sound kind of foolish to say I didn’t.”
————————————————————
Sounds pretty clear to me. He used testosterone throughout his career, probably also in the 2006 Tour, but he can’t admit to it because he’ll be charged for perjury. So by asking him to explain himself more clearly, you are asking him to risk jail time.
I’m not gonna tell you you shouldn’t be upset Larry. I’ve been trying, off and on, to convince people like you he’s been lying for 4 years now–if there wasn’t something deeply wrong with Landis’ lies I wouldn’t have bothered. And I understand Susie’s disinction between lying to the fans and the sort of lying Landis has engaged in–there is a distinction and it’s exactly this sort of behavior that destroyed Landis’ reputation.
So I’ve spend a lot of time thinking about how omerta works and why dopers lie, so maybe it’s a bit easier for me to empathize with them and understand where they are coming from. As JeanC notes, Landis’ behavior did not emerge from a vacuum…there were plenty of precedents set by his colleagues and associates in cycling. Notice how virtually no one in cycling being interviewed in the wake of the Landis scandal is deeply shocked that Landis used PEDs….instead they are trying to defend themselves from the crazy guy.
There’s a lot of moral gray in here. Virtually everyone in this sport lies about dope… from Landis’ perspective…why should he be different?
I think maybe you’ve spent alot of time thinking Landis is some sort of superman and now he’s been exposed as an ordinary human being. It would be a shame to cease supporting this human being at precisely the moment that he’s trying to do some good in the world.
I don’t know the reasons why he’s exposing Lance….there’s probably some less than pure motivations involved. But in practice he appears to be willing to take it on the chin for the rest of humanity.
pro cyclists better at this omerta game than scientologists? onslaught of media to disprove the landis allegations.. The Lance Armstrong bank and trust.. too big to fail?
I don’t really believe either side before the facts come in.. but the manner of the denys.. at every level.. including UCI!! Larry King, VN guy, etc.. is scary.. its like watching Fox news.. and actually believing they are fair and balanced and not on the GOP payroll/side..
Larry,
I’ll argue a few points and then let it go. I’m fairly certain the issue of lying is not a construct of faith. Seriously, if you know of someone who older than, say ~4years old, has reasonably functioning faculties, and has never lied – then we have a living candidate for an actual deity and I might start to believe in religion. I don’t think the issue has much to do with religion or faith. I don’t recall Floyd making a big issue of his parent’s religion. That he grew up Mennonite and left the faith as an adult is a factual and often quoted portion of his biographic background.
I’ll grant you it’s a big lie, to millions of people, and over a number of years. Plenty of people have lied in popular books. Plenty of people have lied in larger public forums. Plenty of people have have lied for longer periods of time. Plenty of people have lied under oath. Some were evil, some were despicable, some made amends, some did not, some were rehabilitatable, some had little to no redeeming value. I think I understand the scope of Floyd’s misdeeds. That’s what I meant in a previous post when I referred to it being a matter of degree. I’d agree Floyd has plenty of work to do in expressing regret and making whatever amends he can to those he has wronged.
Maybe I’m just too jaded to care as much as you? When our Congressmen/women, Senators, and Candidates for President/VP routinely lie to millions and accept contributions totaling millions in order to get elected to office and most accept the massive fraud inherent in our political system, I can’t get too worked up by Floyd in comparison. There are plenty of examples in business and the entertainment industry, as well. I’m sure you can think of a few. I get that you are angry because it was a lie about something you are passionate about. I can’t fault you there. Hopefully the anger will fade over time and this sad saga won’t stunt your world view too much. I’ll leave it at that.
Like TVB, I’m grateful for the knowledge gleaned and the interesting people I’ve met along the way. I’m sorry future athletes will face a tougher process and less sympathetic public if they are falsely accused. I’m angry the fight to have a better system of case management and a more just system of adjudication took such a big hit with Floyd’s announcement. Getting back to Larry, I just don’t see much difference in the lies Floyd told for ~ the last 4 years and the lies we’ve been told about how careful, just, and fair the alphabet soup’s system works. In fact, I find it worse. Lies have been institutionalized, packaged, and sold to the greater public by the people who are supposed to be wearing the white hats. YMMV.
Larry! M! It’s like meeting old friends at a wake (unfortunately…) I’m the former BostonLondonTokyo (John of Boston.)
Found a link to a FFF promotional flyer online:
http://redrockco.com/files/Phoenix_flyer.pdf
It’s worth looking at in light of the recent revelation. $35 a head to attend a Floyd Fairness Fund event…
Yesterday I was apt to be a bit humble and not do an ‘I told you so!’, and I’m not going to do that today either. But looking over all these comments, it’s just undeniable… this fraudulent BS was so extensive, and he has offered no apologies whatsoever for his behavior to his supporters, that I can’t see any redemption here for him or his former fans.
Can someone PLEASE tell me why Floyd is incapable of getting a job and paying these people back? He’s in his mid-thirties. He’s worked less than half of what my father worked for his lifetime. He CAN pay back the $600,000.000 he collected in donations, or at least try. For any of you that want your money returned (and perhaps better used by sending to agencies in Haiti and Chile, for people who actually need money to survive) you have every moral right to seek it out.
As for the logic/semantic arguments about what is truth, who doesn’t lie, everyone lies, etc… no matter how you define a lie, Landis has covered all categories of lying, fraud, deceit, and not just once, but multiple times over multiple years. His rallying cry was that he was being treated unfairly (floyd ‘fairness’ fund…) and yet in sportsmanship, he committed the ultimate unfairness by doping to give him an edge over competitors who didn’t dope. No excuses for this guy, none.
I only recall anti-doping hearings and appeals. Unless I’m forgetting some testimony Landis gave in a real court of law, there is no chance of a charge of perjury. The next person who mentions it should receive a Cadel Evans style beating (it might sting a little, but you won’t get hurt).
Cub,
Perjury is a potential problem. Authority, at the Malibu hearing, was attached to a court in California. I don’t recall which one and don’t have the inclination to research a cite right now. If you were following the hearing, and to jog your memory, recall when the arbitrators were criticized for not compelling LeMond to answer, on cross examination, with said courts authority at their disposal.
I’m going to attempt to take a break from commenting for a while and see how things play out.
uxbunny, you sure change your name a lot! Good to see you, too. Absolutely right about Floyd paying people back. He can write a book telling the entire truth, and devote the proceeds to paying people back. Or he can do restitution by working weekends in a soup kitchen. His “I don’t have the money anymore” stance is morally bankrupt.
Jeff, I appreciate your self-description. Yes, I get the fact that lies told in the context of sports are not as serious as lies told in the context of (say) war and peace. I am not trying to make Landis out to be worse than he is. Nor am I saying that pathological lying is a rare event. We can be cynical and say that we can’t expect our fellow human beings to behave any better than this. I’m certainly capable of this kind of cynicism. But my cynicism does not excuse Landis’ behavior, nor does (or should) it relieve us of the obligation to name what Landis has done. He’s lied. He’s lied not just in an effort to save his own skin, but in an effort to convince thousands of people to support him in his effort to perpetuate the lie. Moreover, if he REALLY did use testosterone in the 2006 Tour, then he’s continuing to lie about it, and his lies damaged (or were intended to damage) the reputations of countless people in the world of anti-doping. Moreover, if he lied about his use of testosterone, then (pending someone doing the legal analysis) he is almost certainly guilty of criminal fraud and perjury. We can be cynical and say, so what, we’re all capable of this kind of behavior. I am personally NOT that cynical, but if we’re going to be cynical, let’s accurately describe what we’re being cynical about. To explain Landis with a statement like “everyone lies” is missing the point. To explain Landis, our cynicism has to go a lot deeper.
Ludwig, I get in part where you and Jean C are coming from. From Jean C’s standpoint, we now know that Landis did not deserve to retain his 2006 maillot jaune, and that there was at least a rough sort of justice in Landis having been banned from cycling. You have additional proof that there was (is?) a doping culture in cycling as well as a conspiracy of silence (what you call “omerta”) among the cyclists and the people on the inside of the cycling community. Personally, I don’t think I ever questioned the basic truth of these two statements, though I certainly fought you on the margins, and I still question the justice of arguing from general statements to particular cases.
But Ludwig: you have stated and I strongly suspect that Landis is continuing to lie. Nothing good can come from his continuing to lie. If he wants to “do some good”, then he has to tell the truth and the whole truth, consequences be damned.
If there are things he doesn’t want to say, fine. For example, he doesn’t have to say that he used testosterone in 2006. He can just keep silent about 2006. He can say that he’s not going to speak about 2006. That’s OK. But assuming that he DID dope with testosterone in 2006, then he can’t continue to lie about it, and at the same time expect anything good to come out of his confessions.
If Landis continues to lie about material, significant doping questions, then we cannot trust anything he has to say about doping in cycling, even if some of the things he’s saying support our own personal points of view. Sorry. Either a witness is credible or he is not. Once you impeach a witness’ credibility by proving that he is lying, you cannot rely on anything the witness has to say on other subjects.
http://www.velonation.com/News/ID/4260/Lance-Armstrong-could-face-criminal-investigation-Landis-credibility-in-question.aspx?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=Feed:+velonation_pro_cycling+(Cycling+News+%26+Race+Results+|+VeloNation.com)&utm_content=Twitter
Bently spoke to the WADA, and they confirmed the eight-year window that they have under the rules to perform retroactive testing on an athlete’s samples. “We’re getting better technology to detect prohibited substances that are abused,” said Dr Gary Wadler of WADA to Bently. “We’ll be able to look backwards as far back as eight years to see if at the time of a given event when the specimen was collected if there were doping agents in the urine. Only Lance Armstrong knows if he has something to hide or not. Athlete beware,” he concluded.
so…. If Armstrong does NOT use legal battle to block testing of the old frozen samples AND they come back neg, I’m on his side. Otherwise. . if he tries to block the testing, that’s very suspect.
Larry
“Either a witness is credible or he is not. Once you impeach a witness’ credibility by proving that he is lying, you cannot rely on anything the witness has to say on other subjects. ”
You appear to be in denial.
Why don’t you just believe that he told the truth about not taking testosterone in 2006. AND that he is telling the truth about doping through out his career, just not testosterone in 2006. Could you believe those two? Then he is not lying and his credibility is not “shot”. And if not, why not?
Does he have to be all clean or all dirty?
Are you one of those who believes he should have just fought his case to the end, but kept his mouth shut after he lost even if he had been doping his whole career. Wouldn’t that be a bigger lie.
M, the statement you quoted from me was addressed to Ludwig, who says that Floyd is lying about not taking testosterone in 2006. If Floyd is lying about not taking testosterone in 2006, that’s more than being a little bit “dirty”. That means that his entire defense against his AAF was a lie, and all the statements he made against LNDD (calling them “corrupt”, for example) were lies, and the statements he made to his supporters to raise hundreds of thousands of dollars were all lies. Moreover, it means that he hasn’t corrected the record about all of this lying. The only portion of the record he’s corrected was that he raced “clean” and won the Tour “fair and square”. Those are significant corrections, to be sure … but if he doped with testosterone in 2006, then he is continuing to lie on a massive scale and he has not done nearly enough to correct the record.
It is possible that he’s telling the truth about his use of testosterone in 2006. But it’s highly unlikely that he’s being truthful about this. First, the only drug he’s admitted to using during the 2006 Tour is HGH, and if Landis used HGH on its own (without a cocktail of other PEDs), that would be a first in the annals of doping. Second, as even his newfound supporters around here are quick to admit, Landis faces some very serious consequences if he admits to lying about his use of testosterone in 2006. Third … Landis does not exactly have a track record of being truthful about his use of performance enhancing drugs. Fourth … what would be the odds that the French lab accused Floyd of the doping he didn’t do, and missed all of the doping he actually did? It’s possible, but unlikely — kind of like if the government accused Bernie Madoff of defrauding investors, and then listed investors that never gave their money to Madoff.
Does Landis have to be “all clean or all dirty”? Of course not. I’m certain that even during the period when Landis lied about his racing clean, there was some truth in the things he had to say, and that some of his statements were completely true. So, not everything that Landis says is a lie, not then, and not now. The problem is, we cannot tell when Landis is lying and when he is telling the truth. We cannot say that Landis is telling the truth only when he happens to say something that matches up with what we personally believe.
It’s been pointed out to me that we all lie. Fair enough. But my legal training tells me that some witnesses are more credible than others, and that when a witness has been caught in a big enough lie, they lose their credibility (their testimony is “impeached”). That’s the damn shame of it. Landis may be telling us some very important truths about cycling and doping. But unless he has proof to back up his statements (and evidently, he has no proof), then his statements are only as good as his credibility. His credibility is in tatters because his credibility has been impeached. He can restore his credibility in part (probably not completely), but only by turning a corner, admitting to all of his previous lies, and most importantly by not continuing to tell lies.
In what way is this denial? I’m not saying that Landis is lying about Lance, or Hincapie, or the UCI taking bribes, or anything else. How would I know? I’m saying that at this moment, Landis cannot be believed.
I find it very difficult to be pragmatic at this point. I’m really not sure I want to jump into all this again. Unlike the subject protagonist, I thought I had succeeded in Putting It All Behind Me(tm) some time ago.
Like so many things, I’ve discovered I was wrong. And like TBV, I don’t regret being wrong – making mistakes is the lesson of life. I just hope I can learn from them. I will undoubtedly make new mistakes; I just hate repeating the old ones.
We really have a forest through the trees problem here. I understand the rush to blame, the anger, the emotional responses. While I don’t join with susie b, I just really don’t understand everything that has just transpired. LNDD hasn’t been vindicated – worse it seems they even missed the HGH usage. UCI is hardly now the shining star of truth and justice. USADA now gets to say “see, we told you so” and thus make the Star Chamber that much more fearsome. Smoke ’em out, hang ’em high, make them an asterisk makes for really, really great administration of justice. In the end, who will watch the watchers? Nothing in the last day has changed my mind about who is the greater danger – the doping athletes or the anti-doping organizations – to sport. I fear Floyd far less than the awesome powers of the state. These are the deeper issues I think we need to continue to analyze.
But I don’t know what those issues are. Sure, Floyd is a liar. (Every attorney’s favorite question on cross: “Were you lying then, or are you lying now? Or is it both?”) This doesn’t mean anyone else is or isn’t, or to what extent. Allegation, denials, promises of investigations, no comment, etc etc is all I’ve seen. I can’t conclude anything.
Should I learn from my prior mistake and stop taking people at their word? I saw no credible evidence against Floyd. And fairly, I’m not sure I should now. I think it is possible that he has Totally Lost It, and is so far divorced from reality, that even he can’t distinguish facts, or remember correctly. Mental illness is a horrible thing, no less horrible than the disease Livestrong is fighting. And he may not be the only one: Even Mrs./Dr. Eightzero said to me once about the 2006 Tour, “yeesshh…let it go.” I’m not a pro cyclist – imagine the pressures they face. Imagine being a pro cyclist with the weight of a global disease on your shoulders, and the hopes of those clinging to life and death decisions. Now choose your words and actions carefully. Argh.
The rhetoric is massive. For a good example, see this article in the Cycling News:
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/kimmage-landis-allegations-will-decide-the-sports-future
I saw a recent tweet asking about the whereabouts of Betsy Andreau. When will all that resurface (and you know it will)? How about Tyler Hamilton – wasn’t he on the team with Floyd when a ll this went down? There’s an arrest warrant for Floyd in France, and what has to be going through Arnie Baker’s mind about now? Just off the top of my head, I don’t know that anything in Arnie’s work is now any less true or credible. I still think LNDD dorked this up by the numbers. Isn’t that a *greater* concern right now? Assume Floyd’s admission against interest is true (“I doped and won a whole bunch of races”) doesn’t that mean the whole anti-doping crusade is illusory and ineffective? That we executed a murderer not because of that murder, but because we erroneously thought they killed someone else isn’t troubling?
Or hell, just go with susie b and call liars pieces of shit. I recently looked at a picture of the Gulf of Mexico and didn’t have a whole bunch of outrage for Floyd.
How much easier for me to say “I don’t want this sport anymore. I’m slamming the door and I’m leaving.” *sigh*
For the record I didn’t say for certain Landis is lying about the synthetic testosterone. Of course, there is a very good chance he is..that would explain the positive and all.
What Landis did say was he was doping during the 2006 Tour. He also implied that this doping may have caused the positive. It’s been documented that riders are not necessarily aware of every substance being injected into their bodies via IVs or blood doping regimens.
Cub, good point it might be true that Landis is immune from legal retaliation… But what about civil retaliation. If Landis admits he was lying about the testosterone then what about civil suits?
Either way I don’t put much weight into the credibility issue, because it doesn’t explain why Landis would be lying now. Landis had plenty of good reasons and plenty of precedence to lie in order to clear his name. But he has no reason to lie now…and nothing to gain from lying. Whatever motivated him to do it, he seems to believe blowing up the UCI and USA Cycling would be a good thing for cycling as a whole.
Larry,
I really do think you are in denial. Why would Landis admit cheating now if it wasn’t the truth. What is his motive now?
He had a clear motive to lie before. He was trying to keep his livelihood. So you expect him to admit to a possible felony before you will believe him. Yeah right.
“Fourth … what would be the odds that the French lab accused Floyd of the doping he didn’t do, and missed all of the doping he actually did?”
The old Larry would have answered that question as pretty high!
Based on the testimony of so many ex-dopers, the testing rarely caught them. That has always been my argument too. The dopers are ahead of the testers. The testing is just too weak and hit and miss.
8-0, I think you correctly recognize that the ADAs are not infallible and that an athlete who feels wrongfully accused by the ADAs deserves our sympathy and a fair hearing. Problem is, Landis is the latest in a long line of athletes who cried foul when accused of using PEDs, only to confess later on. Landis has made it much harder for an athlete to believably challenge an AAF.
Landis is the classic case of chutzpah. Well, actually, the classic case is the kid who murders his parents, and then asks the judge to show mercy to a poor orphan boy. I can understand how Landis got himself into this mess, but I can’t feel sorry for him. I’ll reserve my sympathy for the folks he defrauded though his “fairness” fund, his book sales and otherwise. I’ll reserve my sympathy for the next athlete falsely accused of an AAF, who cannot get anyone to believe him (or her) because Landis cried “wolf” so loudly and with such deceptive skill.
I should feel sorry for Floyd? Why? He hasn’t apologized for lying to us. He hasn’t asked for our forgiveness. Honestly, before the man deserves my sympathy, he’s going to have to show a little more contrition. His “I’m not sorry I doped” doesn’t exactly cut it in the contrition department.
Yup, yup, yup. I’m with Susie B. If she ever comes to Los Angeles, I’ll buy her two drinks. Yes, I’ve upped the offer from one drink to two, because these comments have entered their second day and Susie remains the only person here who truly “gets it”. And by “only person”, I mean that Susie got it on the first take, and I’m still trying to get it after numerous takes. (Susie, to clarify, I won’t buy you three drinks if these comments go on into a third day. There’s no limit to my admiration for you, only to the number of drinks I’m willing to buy.)
You said you’re not sure if “LNDD dorked this up by the numbers”. Well, Floyd continues to maintain that LNDD DID dork this up. Floyd has not taken back ANTHING he’s said about his AAF. If Floyd is now telling the truth, then this would confirm 90% of the stuff you and I said here back in the day. It’s just that I don’t believe Floyd is telling the truth.
Sorry 8-0. Floyd is a liar, and if he’s not technically guilty of fraud and perjury, then he should be grateful that the law creates legal technicalities. Yes, I too can watch TV spills about the oil spill in the Gulf. If spilling oil into the Gulf is the bright line test for distinguishing between acceptable and unacceptable behavior, then we can free up a lot of prison space.
Personally … I taught my kid to respect the awesome destruction that is unleashed by lying. Lying erodes trust. It’s a truly terrible thing when someone lies and makes us reluctant to trust each other. Floyd not only lied. He looked each of us in the eye and said, you can trust me. It was a depraved act.
Looking for any hint of a silver lining in this dark cloud, I’d like to see Landis and Lim provide full disclosure on his PED program up to and during the 2006 tour. Details including what was taken and when, with an accounting of the methodology behind it and cross-referenced with the dates and results of his tests from LNDD as well as any unofficial tests that Lim or anybody else may have taken during the time.
That type of disclosure would certainly accomplish more practical good for cycling and drug testing efforts than all of the unsubstantiated attacks.
Larry, you and I (again) agree more that we think. I too feel sorry for an innocent, victimized person falsely accused. I don’t feel sorry for Floyd: he did lie, and lied in a big way. He may still be telling MORE lies now. I don’t feel defrauded, even though I was a FFF contributor and book buyer. I donated to other misguided causes (heck, I admit I even voted for Ronald Reagan once. Part of my reckless youth….) My loss is small, and I accepted the possibility Floyd was lying before I put the money down. This is a far cry from Madoff’s doings.
My current take on this is that there is a difference between evil and sickness. I’m not sure where we really are yet. What is all this about his drafting an email to attempt to get anmesty? Amnesty for what? Floyd’s cases are all done and dealt with (although I wonder what that confidential settlement of the federal case contains) so this seems incongruous. A sane person seeking to confess wouldn’t be using email. Even Floyd doesn’t seem to know what he is saying. What the heck does “write it however you want” mean? WTF?
I’m not really keeping a tally on contrition quotient. Where was the outrage when Riis copped to doping? The French love Virenque, and I think there is even a monument to Tommy Simpson on the slopes of Ventoux. Caveat Emptor is one of the cornerstones of the law, and yet we want to get pissed at someone when we discover they are a lying piece of shit. LNDD looked us right in the eye and said “our tests are reliable” and it turns out they apparently aren’t. I’m guessing there is some real doubt in their minds about this too. Are they lying peices of shit?
To cyclists, doping is an infraction, part of the game. Why don’t fans call football players lying peices of shit when those players protest a refs call? I put money on a pro football team in Vegas to win the superbowl, and it is clear from the replay that the refs dorked up a key call that cost me more money that I gave to FFF. Don’t see the winning team coming out and saying, “yeah, I caught that ball out of bounds. I framed it up for the ref, and lied about it to get a good call.” In the NHL, punching a guy is expected when he makes a legal, yet perceived dirty play. The refs stand and watch as they shed blood.
I pointed something else untenable some time ago: now we know (or think we know) Floyd doped continuously for his career. Including while on postal. Including his participation as a team member for Lance. And cycling is a team sport. So isn’t it fair to say *right now* that at least one of Lance Armstrong’s wins are the result of doping? Sure, someone else’s doping, but when a runner drops a baton in a relay, that’s a DNF for the entire team. I remember Lance trying to get Floyd a stage win in one of his TdF victories after Floyd took lance up a finishing mountain. Lance won that stage because he benefitted from a doper. ASO has been after The Big Kahuna for years, so will this be the final straw? ASO will simply do what is most profitable, so probably not, but who knows?
All I know right now (still) is that I don’t know anything. I’ve been lied to so many times that I’m not sure I care to fight the windmills anymore.
Still, there are learned and eloquent people here at RYHO and back in the day at Trustbut. Like you, Larry. Heck, I can’t believe I’m actually starting to understand JeanC. But then, I also recently have come to appreciate Ronald Reagan.
As per the issue of whether or not Floyd took testosterone during the TdF in 2006, I have a few questions/comments: First – How ethical/unethical can it be for a rider to use PED’s for most of their career but insist that they rode ‘clean’ for one sporting event? Aren’t the supposed benefits of using PED’s part of an overall strategy to be a champion both in preparatory training and in actual events? In other words, where do you draw the time line that says ‘this is where I started doping, and this is where I stopped.’ Is it a week? A year? When can you say ‘I’m no longer benefitting from the boost that PED’s gave me.’
There still seems to be these fears about whether or not the labs got it wrong. Floyd could very easily clear this up by saying that yes, he did in fact take something that could have affected his T/E ratio; he maintains that that’s not the case, or something happened that he doesn’t know about. There would be thousands of pages to read but I do remember that Landis did say that the finding was incorrect, that the lab got the wrong result (back in the day.) However, at this point, based on Landis’ recent confession, he’s been rather haphazard about what things he was taking and when. In other words, who knows what sort of cocktail was in Landis’ system, and how that may or may not have affected his T/E ratio. C’mon, this was the guy who was saying that whiskey could have done it. So for those out there who are still saying ‘they got it wrong’, is that even worth asking at this point? He has confessed to being a doper. He has said that others were involved with him. Others gave him advice and direction. ANYTHING could have happened. He argued both sides of the fence, first saying that something MUST have contributed to the elevated ratio, then saying that the lab messed it up. He wanted it both ways.
When faced with these two entities to trust: Floyd the confessed doper, or the (so called) Star Chamber, I will take the latter. In nearly every case they’ve managed, their suspects ended up confessing not much later on. No one’s convincingly unveiled the widespread conspiracy yet. And their BEST case to upend them, Landis, wound up being a self-serving ass.
Well, well. I always wondered how I would react if Floyd ever came out and said he actually did dope during his career. I knew my reaction wouldn’t be as extreme as susie b’s, but I thought I’d feel some anger. I don’t feel much of anything. Mainly, I guess I’m just so tired of athletes denials of PED use, and then getting so mentally bent out of shape for lying that they have to confess to clear their conscience. Not doping and lying about it to begin with would save the poor dears a lot of sleepless nights, but that’s just too hard figure out. Would Floyd have won ANY of those races in 2006 without PED help? Probably not. I was really looking forward to the Nature Valley Grand Prix again next month, hoping to see Floyd race with the Bahati team. Doesn’t seem too likely now, and I’m not interested anymore.
As a contributor to the FFF, at first I thought it’s not important to get my money back, as it did some good exposing a corrupt system. But, the more I think about it…hmmm…it would be nice to receive a surprise check in the mail.
People have every right to be upset that he lied to us all. But we are not the most important recipients of his disception. The most important and disturbing aspect of all this is how much and low long he lied to Amber and Ryan, and the effect on their lives. And then had Ryan up on the winner’s podium with him in Paris. I used to think that was a wonderful sight, Floyd with a broad, happy smile on his face, she looking a little nervous. Now it’s just really sad. Winning at all costs, cheating at all costs–and it cost him his family.
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/team-radioshack-reveal-further-emails-from-landis
omg
Ludwig and M, I understand that from a certain perspective it does not matter whether Landis doped with testosterone in 2006. After all, he was a lying cheating denying doper who got what he deserved, and now we all have the sense that Landis received a rough sort of justice. There’s also the chance that he’ll provide the authorities with valid information about doping in cycling; that is, if he’s ever able to demonstrate to anyone’s satisfaction that his word means anything.
But from a more important perspective, it matters a great deal whether Landis doped with testosterone during the 2006 Tour. We need to know if the anti-doping system works. M, you’re right: you and I argued for months whether the tests were right or wrong, fair or not, supported or not by WADA’s own rules. It was very important to both of us at the time whether WADA got it right, LNDD got it right, the arbitrators got it right. It is still important.
If Floyd is telling the truth, then his confession of being a doper is relatively unimportant. We can add Floyd’s name to the list of all the other guys who doped. The list is so long, I can’t be counted on to remember everyone on the list. Floyd’s name probably belongs at the top of the list, but it was a long list before Floyd’s name was added, and Floyd will not be the last cyclist added to the list.
If Floyd is telling the truth, then the bigger news is that TBV was right, Rant was right, Tom Fine was right, 8-0 was right, Duckstrap was right, Swim You Idiot was right, strbuk was right, and a bunch of other people were right: Floyd was innocent of the charged AAF. The lab screwed up, or the lab was corrupt, or the science underlying the test is no good, or something else went wrong. If Floyd is telling the truth, then the WADA rules and the ISO rules and the rules of common sense and fair play demand an investigation into what went wrong with Landis’ testing. M, you can’t just say that the testing is “hit and miss” – you and I both know from the time we spent in the rules that a false negative is tolerable and a false positive requires action.
The fact is, no one is reacting to Floyd’s confession with a demand that heads roll at WADA, LNDD or USADA. I strongly suspect that we all know the reason for this: no one at WADA, USADA or LNDD believes for a split second that Landis is telling the truth about not doping with testosterone during the 2006 Tour. No one in the press believes him either, which is why no one in the press has taken up this aspect of the story. In other words, the world at large and the people in the ADAs all think that Landis is continuing to lie about the central issue in the 2006 AAF, the central issue we argued about for what felt like years. If Landis IS continuing to lie about this, then how impressed can you expect me to be with his supposedly newfound respect for the truth?
Is Landis lying about his being a doper? Anything is possible. Landis is a liar on a level and to an extent that I cannot even begin to understand. Sure, he was under pressure, wanted to preserve his name and livelihood, etc., etc. In that respect, he’s like every other doping cyclist. What makes Landis unique is the extent to which he took his lie, his willingness to implicate his accusers, and the extent to which he was willing to hoodwink the public without an apparent moment of remorse, not then, not now. I cannot possibly imagine what could go through a mind this twisted.
If I wanted to ask myself why Landis might have done this, or that, or the other thing, I’d start with asking how Landis could have destroyed his life, bankrupted his finances, punted away his marriage, and asked thousands of people for hundreds of thousands of dollars, all in an effort to prove that the authorities had failed to correctly describe how he doped his way to a maillot jaune.
But I’m not nearly in the kind of denial you seem to think. While I would not trust Landis at this point to give me his correct shoe size, I don’t doubt that he doped during the 2006 Tour and before.
Finally, M, you ask if I expect Floyd to cop to perjury? Nope. I do not. But I cannot consider Floyd to be truthful if he’s willing to tell the truth only when he has no reason to lie. The word for a person who tells the truth only when it’s convenient? That word is “liar”. Moreover, how in the world can I crawl into Landis’ head and figure out when he has a reason to lie and when he doesn’t?
Larry, Floyd’s confession changes nothing about other parties’ conduct. I still see no credible scientific evidence that the drug testing conducted on S17 was correct. The lab errors documented by Arnie Baker are still *true*. This makes Floyd’s assertion that he didn’t use testosterone irrelevant. I find little comfort in getting the right answer for the wrong reason. It is all too easy to next get the wrong answer for those very same reasons. Others also demand the state be put to their proof, and we benefit from that challenge. And uxbunny prefers the star chamber. Reminds me of Martin Niemoller’s poem. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_they_came…
Dammit, windmills on the horizon.
It gets worse. http://bit.ly/9cm75C.
Even worse:
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/22/sports/cycling/22cycling.html
USDA and Novitsky on the case. Jezuz. Some considering cooperating. I guess that is the amnesty angle. Amnesty for others.
Larry, eightzero,
Its just more of the Lance total control.. as he is a racing master.. he’s also a media master. guilty or not, LA knows how to divert the flow..
I read thru all the emails Lance posted. The thing that REALLY interests me is that they did NOT include ANY of Lances responses.. they only posted the one side.. that surprisingly.. favors LA.. but only slightly.. its not the smoking gun LA makes them out to be.. I did see some unfortunately stress Kay was experiencing..
The LA media machine is making alot of accusations.. they are obviously winning public support.. but not really giving detailed examples… maybe a nugget here and there.. but nothing that sticks.. they are certainly good at what they do.. racing bikes and controlling the media.
If what FL says is true, the only hope for him is if someone he names comes forward.. or the testing of the older samples brings a positive result. They probably won’t find anything, but the tests have improved.. I hope that if indeed these folks did dope.. something sticks..
Frankie A. and Lemond sticking up for FL.. is one positive on FL side..
If you read this article, its very convincing that Armstrong doped in 99.. armstrongs excuse on them spiking it.. is lame. Here is the article: http://nyvelocity.com/content/interviews/2009/michael-ashenden
the cyclingnews emails are genuinely confusing to me. I don’t understand Dr Kay writing:
“We know you [Floyd] didn’t do anything wrong and that you won the Tour de France fair and square.”
Does this make any sense given the confession of systematic PED use? I’m honestly having a “I know what all those words mean but not when you put them together like that” reaction.
It’s a whole lot to take in, that’s for sure. I think that message was sent at the end of April. Hard to know what Dr. Kay would say about that today, I haven’t seen any responses from him in the media.
Given what Floyd has said in the last few days, that’s a hard sentence to parse. If Floyd was using banned substances, but not testosterone, during the 2006 Tour (and he’s admitted at least that much), I’d hardly call that winning “fair and square.” Unless, of course, it truly is the case that everyone in the pro peloton is doping and using the same regimen. (At least the playing field would be level then.)
I don’t have Dr. Kay’s personal phone number or email. But if I find a way of getting a comment, I’ll certainly post what he says.
Supposing that Landis was telling the truth in 2006 that he didn’t use testosterone, and supposing that he’s telling the truth now about what he did use, then it doesn’t cast the anti-doping system in a very good light. The got him, but they actually didn’t get him for what he was doing. That’s rough justice, I suppose. But the system failed, in a bigger sense. If the tests are so good, they should have got him on the things he was doing — not for something he didn’t use. I don’t expect that will be a big topic in the mainstream press, though.
It’s an ugly time for pro cycling. Or at least for pro cycling in North America. The sport will survive, just like it did in the aftermath of the Festina affair. What changes, if any, will occur in the aftermath of all this?
I’m wondering WADA, USADA and the UCI will take the right lessons from this episode. I’m not holding my breath.
Tyler Hamilton. Its now or never..
The gist of the counter-attack by Lance and his team is that Landis threatened to go public with accusations against Lance if Lance did not add Landis to Team Radio Shack.
The emails released so far by Team Radio Shack do not conclusively prove this allegation … in fact, the Kay emails seem to indicate that Landis would not want to race with Lance, because there was bad blood between Lance and Landis.
Landis’ own emails focus not on rejoining Lance, but on the Tour of California’s decision not to invite Landis’ team OUCH to the race. Landis’ tone in his letters to TofC officials is antagonistic and threatening. Landis never offers to take any particular action in exchange for OUCH’s admission into the race, but he did demand that the TofC return money paid by the OUCH team for a VIP tent if the TofC was not going to permit the OUCH team to race. That strikes me as aggressive conduct by Landis, but not improper.
Still, it was clearly Kay’s goal to broker a peace between Lance and Landis, where Landis would join Team Radio Shack, ride in the Vuelta, and then retire with a sense of closure and restored dignity. Of course, at the same time Landis was threatening to tell all to the authorities. It’s a nasty combination of events, and Kay seemed to pick up the implication that his efforts in combination with Landis’ threats might result in legal liability, probably for blackmail or a similar crime. The better interpretation, I think, is that there was a disconnect between Landis and Kay. Kay wanted Floyd to peacefully end his career riding off into a Spanish sunset; Floyd had another agenda.
There’s one other thing to note. You would think that the ADAs would be enthusiastic about having Landis come forward to name names and point fingers. But there’s a decided COOLNESS to the way Landis has been received by USADA, USA Cycling and WADA. I think Pat McQuaid may have pinpointed it: the authorities would have preferred Landis to privately reveal all he knew (or claims to know) about doping in cycling, and to let the authorities proceed from there to make a proper investigation.
We’ll need time to sort this all out.
Larry, you said “I think Pat McQuaid may have pinpointed it: the authorities would have preferred Landis to privately reveal all he knew (or claims to know) about doping in cycling, and to let the authorities proceed from there to make a proper investigation”.
I think that is what Landis was trying to do. Unless I missed some new revelation today, it wasn’t Floyd that leaked the e-mails.
Anyway, I’m keeping mental score on all this, hoping to find something positive to grasp on to, and so far it goes something like this:
Jonathan Vaughters +2. He’s the only one so far who’s public reaction didn’t make me at least a little queasy. I think he’s right to focus on the present and not comment on what may or may not have happened in the past.
Greg Lemond +2. I like that his reaction was controlled when he could have gloated. I now think he might have been telling the truth when he said Floyd confessed to doping in their phone conversation. Apparently he was right when he told Floyd that hiding his secret would eat him up inside. Maybe he deserves more than +2, but I’m not a fan and it’s hard for me to give him any credit.
Dave Zabriski +0. I think he probably shouldn’t have said anything at all or should have merely echoed Vaughter’s sentiments.
Floyd +0. There are so many pluses and minuses, but in my mind they pretty much balance out.
Lance Armstrong, Johan Bruyneel, Radio Shack -5. Not so much because of what Floyd accuses them of, which is really nothing new, but because of the way they have reacted. I understand if they are angry at Floyd, but throwing him under the bus and driving it back and forth over him is taking the low road to put it mildly. Reading those e-mails they released made me feel kind of dirty, mainly because so much of the content was from Dr. Kay not from Floyd. Furthermore the e-mails do not (IMO) support their contention that Floyd is borderline nuts or that he tried to blackmail them. Finally they say they are only reacting to the e-mails released to the public by Floyd, when as far as we know it wasn’t Floyd who released them.
Pat McQuaid: Meh.
Cub, wasn’t it Floyd’s intention to reveal everything publicly when he did? Do you think he came forward earlier than he had intended, and spoke to Bonnie Ford because someone leaked his emails? These are not rhetorical questions … did I miss something?
Thinking about it … if Floyd had gotten his way and was able to ride with his OUCH team in the TofC, then there’s no way he would have come public with his confession and his accusations at this time. Even if Floyd would have been willing to ride in a peleton that would largely have resented his presence, he would have been subject to the most extremely negative fan reaction you could imagine. Remember that the TofC is a virtual tour of Floyd’s primary fundraising efforts for his “fairness fund”. I doubt there’s a bicycle shop of any repute along the TofC route that failed to host a fundraiser, a kegger, a “Ride With Floyd” event. The race route is packed with people who personally heard Floyd protest his innocence, and who gave Floyd $25, $50, $2500. Maybe the French have given grief to Lance over the years, but you have no idea what my fellow Californians would have to say to Floyd as he pedalled by.
It would not have been a pleasant 800 mile ride. That’s for sure.
Larry,
I think Cub is right. From what I’ve seen, Landis didn’t intend for this information to come out publicly at this time. (Although, he must have known that it would eventually.) Someone else appears to have leaked the information to various media outlets. It’s not clear who that was. One could put together a rogues gallery of those who would have reason to, and their motivations for doing so.
Floyd’s interview with Bonnie Ford happened after he’d found out that the story was leaking, from what I understand. As was the phone call to his mom, which must have been difficult, to say the least. Can you imagine calling your mother to confess to something like that? Just the thought makes my skin crawl.
Landis’ intention was to negotiate behind the scenes with the various authorities, and to try and get an agreement for amnesty for whoever would cooperate. Using email to communicate with them may not have been the brightest idea, though, as the information could easily be forwarded on. And, apparently, it was.
Larry asked, “Cub, wasn’t it Floyd’s intention to reveal everything publicly when he did? Do you think he came forward earlier than he had intended, and spoke to Bonnie Ford because someone leaked his emails? These are not rhetorical questions … did I miss something?”
I feel that on every post I make I should say that I’m speculating to some extent, that I really don’t know, and that I could have missed something or just plain be wrong. So having said that…
Yes, I think Floyd may have intended to work in the background with US Cycling and the ADAs, to unload all his knowledge of doping on them, and let them decide what to do with it. Maybe he would have gone public if they decided to do nothing. I don’t know, I’m speculating, but I already said that. I guess the point is that I haven’t seen any evidence that he intended to go public, at least not at this time.
Where I got the impression that Floyd only spoke out because the e-mails were leaked, I don’t recall. I think it was from the original Bonnie D. Ford article which only mentions that he sent e-mails to USA Cycling and other officials, and nothing about him intending to go public. Also the interview clearly occurred after the e-mails were leaked. Actually I think the original version of the article is gone. It changed after reactions started to come in from Armstrong and others, and I think some information was lost. Here’s a link anyway http://sports.espn.go.com/oly/cycling/news/story?id=5203604.
I’m not necessarily trying to defend Floyd, I’m just trying to form a view of this whole situation based on facts. If some credible evidence surfaces that Floyd intended to go public all along, either out of vindictiveness or a desire to somehow magically change cycling, I’ll change my view. If something proves that Floyd really is a blackmailing nut case, I’ll accept it. For now I think that stuff is just PR BS coming from Armstrong & Co.
Anyway, I think I better stop commenting because I have nothing factual to add. It’s a bad situation for everyone involved, and I’m not making it any better.
Did anyone else find the email from Kay which asked Floyd to do this (ride with Shack) for their wives? I would guess the divorce was more for financial reasons than for a relational reasons. My point is that Landis marriage as some have stated was not destroyed.
I think that Larry hit it on the head about WADA, USADA, etc, do not care if he was guilty of testerone use. In fact I think the case showed the test results were not reliable. So I am understanding that M and others involved in the prosecution of Landis really care less. The mindset is that they are trying to rid sports of doping and how they do it does not matter. In fact, in retrospect, everyone is probably doping and when a positive doping shows up, that person is going to get nailed. False positives really do not matter because everyone is doping and there is no true false positive. I think I finally get that. Not sure that I like it, but I get it.
I do not believe Floyd is doing this to clear his conscience. He stated he does not feel guilty about doping. Ultimately it appears from the emails that Floyd believed that Lance must control much of what is going on in cycling. In Landis’ mind, since he only did what everyone else was doing and was a loyal soldier (not spilling the beans on Lance), he expected to be welcomed back into the cycling world. It appears that Lance probably did what he could do to keep Floyd out. Floyd finally became frustrated, angry, etc with this fact. He simply decided to act on what appears to be one of his few options. He decided to cooperate with the powers that be. In retrospect, he should have done this from the beginning, but he is stubborn and it took him this long to realize it.
Only my speculative thoughts.
and I’ll cop to being incredibly naive from the getgo just to get that out of the way, but does palmares of the ex-postal/discovery riders post postal/discovery support their doping under bruyneel? Tyler’s breakout season was 2003 (LBL, romandie, 4th in the tour) and he left lance et al at the end of 2001. essentially the same trajectory for landis, fairly anonymous 2005, starts 2006 on fire. If I’m assuming PEDs work and work reasonably fast, and the landis was following the same protocol as at postal, why the lag? to reiterate the obvious, yes, I’m very naive etc. etc. But is there a possible history where this is what you’d expect?
Awww Larry, you are very sweet. And yes, you & I seem to be completely on the same page right now. I agree with much if not all you’ve written. You’re actually one of several men, all on the West coast for some reason, to offer me multiple drinks in the last 3 days. If I ever to get out there, I could go on a week-long bender, if I were so inclined. 🙂
I’ve calmed down a bit since Thursday (& HEY, to the guy who spit a bit on my ranting, this IS ‘RANT YOUR HEAD OFF!’ after all!), but am still thoroughly disgusted & WANT MY MONEY BACK & the lying POS in prison. His doping & lying for years pales in comparison to ME that he ASKED for & TOOK MONEY FOR THAT LIE.
And Rant, TBV, & those of you who witnessed the Hearing in person or heard every single word would probably know better as my memory just aint what it used to be, but Floyd was flat-out asked in the Hearing NOT just if he took Testosterone but ANY PED not just in the Tour but in his CAREER. And he said NO. And I thought he put his hand on a Bible & was sworn in? Plus, even though I know it was not a TRIAL, I thought the Hearing had LEGAL weight. Why else take an oath?
And yes, spending hours/weeks/months & (sigh)YEARS, reading, writing, discussing, & defending (arrrrgghh) Floyd was not a COMPLETE waste of time as I did ‘virtually’ meet some great people, including many here & at TBV & in fact, all my current web “friends”. However, & please don’t take offense, I feel a bit like one of the Titanic surivors – (this is a METAPHOR, people) Sure, we experienced something horrific, have nightmares, witnessed the ship go down & thousands of people drown or freeze to death, but hey, we made some buddies in the lifeboat.
Anyway, if any of you REALLY think Floyd’s “confessing” is for the GOOD of cycling, specifically, American cycling, I’ve got a t-shirt, hat & 2 posters for you. AT the rock bottom discount price of…$625! It is blatantly apparent that the acid of Floyd’s bitterness has corroded his soul & being. When his LAST chance to go out of the sport a “winner” was kept from him by AEG, he 1st tried to blackmail his way in. (Not ALL the emails & phone calls are on the Radio Shack site). So, guess his CONSCIENCE wasn’t gnawing at him too much just a freakin MONTH ago. And poor Dr Kay. I thought it was heartbreaking to read how much this man tried to SAVE Floyd from his self. He wanted to help Floyd so much that he became delusional thinking Lance/Johan would ever let him on the team after Floyd’s threats. I agree it’s a bit confusing whether Dr Kay knew about Floyd’s doping even a mere 2 weeks ago. Also, he seems to think the French lab was disolved. Did I MISS something? Still, I feel very sad for HIM. And Floyd’s parents & ALL his supporters.
And if any of you want to continue debating whether Floyd actually doped with T &/or the tests accurately detected it, well, I can’t stop you. But, once again, I’m reminded of the Titanic. There once was a group of Titanic geeks who REJOICED when THEIR thesis was “proved” : that the iceberg hit HERE & NOT THERE. They crowed to one & all they were RIGHT, they were RIGHT! Well, whoopdeedamndoo. The FACT is the damn ship went down. And thousands died.
Well, I care why the ship went down so thousands more don’t have to die. I’d like to build a better boat; maybe one that isn’t a PIECE of SHIT.
1. I believe Landis is trying to clear his conscience and the lies he has been living with. But he is also a very bitter man because he believes he has been victimized while having done nothing worse than all the other top level cyclists.
“Landis himself had tried to get others to co-operate with him, said Andrew Messick, sports director of A.E.G, which runs the Amgen Tour of California: “He was trying to find other riders to come clean with him, but nobody would.” Messick suggested that Landis tell his story to the United States Anti-Doping Agency.
In the New York Times, Messick said that he had a conversation with Landis in early April. He told me: ‘I’ve been living a lie. I can’t sleep at night. I have to ease my burden, so I’ve got to tell the truth about what I’ve done.”
Cyclingnews.
2. I have always argued that the testosterone doping finding was (80% likely) correct. That was enough for me to convict. Landis’s later admissions of career doping, even if he hedges about having purposely taken testosterone, reinforces my original beliefs. I’m thinking he took something else with testosterone (transfused blood or whatever) without knowing, or he is still lying or even mis-remembering since he might be taking multiple substances.
I certainly don’t doubt his admission of career doping.
3. What about you folks, does the fact that he now admits career doping, but doesn’t admit taking testosterone, make you less or more likely to believe the test was accurate.
Do you believe his admission of career doping?
Do any of you believe that his admission of career doping makes his denial of taking testosterone more, rather than less, credible?
4. One reason Landis might not admit taking testosterone. To keep faith with all those who supported him. That he wasn’t lying to you about the specific basis for his legal challenge.
From what I can remember he is already on the hook for potential false testimony/perjury when he testified at the hearing that he had never taken any illicit substances in his career.
5. Would any of you here believe a top grand tour podium finisher, say Lance Armstrong or whoever, if he stated that he had never taken any illicit substance in his career? If so who?
But eightzero, people go across the Atlantic in PLANES now. 😉
Anyway, one of the reasons I stopped commenting much here the past 2 years is that I just couldn’t take the doping talk. Any. More. I know most of you disagree with me, but CONSTANTLY going back & hunting down the dopers – how far do we go? One year? Three? Five? Why not TEN? TWENTY? Do you SERIOUSLY BELIEVE Indurain got his big tall ass over the ALPS without a PED when the REST of the peloton was doping? If you go after Lance then you better be prepared to take down the ENTIRE SPORT for the last 25 years. And who/what does that benefit?
Don’t get me wrong, I actually want to STEP UP the anti-doping efforts now. And I think dopers should be thrown out for THREE years as it’s apparent 2 just ain’t making an impression. But, this constant, never-ending, OBSESSION to get Lance or any other cyclist before 2006 needs to stop. It is only HURTING the sport. And yes, I DO think you can increase anti-doping now WITHOUT trashing & burning the past.
Mostly BECAUSE of all the reading I did after Floyd’s Tour, I reluctantly came to the conclusion some time ago that most of the pro-peloton had been doping since the mid-80s. It wasn’t just accepted or condoned, it WAS the culture. And perhaps I AM naive to think it CAN change & move forward without destroying EVRYTHING that it was.
As for ANYTHING that comes out of Fraud Landis’ mouth? DOES NOT MATTER. As I think Larry said, I wouldn’t trust he’d give his correct shoe size. He is intent on a SCORCHED EARTH plan : to get back at EVERYONE who he sees as destroying him or keeping him from a comeback. The VERY fact he TRIED repeatedly to get into the current ToC just WEEKS AGO blows the “conscience” theory out of the water. “Ease his burden”? ARE YOU KIDDING ME? This is a PIECE OF SHIT that STOLE MILLIONS OF DOLLARS from INNOCENT PEOPLE! He looked some of them RIGHT IN THE FACE & said he had NEVER USED PEDS. You believe ANYTHING this guy says?!!!
And ABSOLUTELY – why CAN’T he pay us back? They’ve got the list. He’s young. He’s an ex-Mennonite. They know HOW to work. GET BUSY! I’ll be waiting. I won’t even charge INTEREST.
Maybe Landis is trying to clear his conscience. I am willing to admit it is a possibility.
I do not doubt Landis’ admission to doping since 2002. Now I want to clarify what people mean by career doping. He had a career long before 2002. Do you mean Cat 1 professional career? I keep hearing for all of his career which by his admission was from 2002-2006 and that is not the totality of his career.
I will be interested to see his diary, if it is ever published. He said that he kept detailed records of what he took and when. So I am interested to see what he took during the 2006 tour. I would not be surprised that he did not take testerone. I never was convinced by the scientific evidence from his trials. It always seemed suspect. Might he be trying to save face with his supporters? I somehow doubt that. What face does he have to save? Also, since he may be on the hook for his denials at the hearings, I do not see what he had to gain by not admitting to testerone use in the Tour.
I have been converted. I suspect they all dope. What some of the scientist have stated is likely true. The only way to complete the Tour in the fashion it is completed is with peds.
In a funny way, I think Landis’ bitterness reinforces this point. In fact, in a funny way, what Lance wants people to believe is that the bitterness just shows he is lying. I think the bitterness is based upon the fact M states in point 1. Everyone is doing it so why is he a pariah now. I think I would struggle with some bitterness as well. So I think it actually reinforces what he says about Lance and not want Lance wants to try to show.
Just got back from a ride, and had a few hours to myself to think. I still don’t know anything. However, I do think there is a non-zero possibility that Floyd has chosen the nuclear option. Deserved or not, his life hasn’t been wonderful for some time. The phrase “what do I have to lose?” starts to set in. It would explain his inability to feel remorse, his lack of apology. “From hell’s heart, I stab at thee….”
Again, I agree with Larry. This will take a long time to sort out. Seems pretty clear the RadioShack suits have a playbook ready for this. Larry is also right: Alphabetsoupland sure isn’t falling over itself with joy. As Cal points out, this “diary” or training log Floyd refers to sounds interesting.
This is all about to become an archeological dig. And as Henry Jones Junior (“Indiana”) told his class, that is the search for *fact.* If you’re interested in truth, the philosophy class is down the hall.
From what I understand, at least some of the alphabets have said more or less “Put up or shut up”; that Landis need to show some hard evidence to back up his allegations. And this goes well with some of what I have been saying: anybody can claim that (other) cyclists are doping, but unless you have something more than just your claim, it isn’t worth a lick. Add to this the fact that Landis’ story has now changed, how much credence can and should we give him?
Regarding the testing and LNDD et al, let’s not forget the big picture. If what Landis now says in true (he didn’y use T but did use other PEDs), why didn’t they get him on the right thing? We may fell some sense of justice that he got busted, even if it was for the wrong reason. And then suppose he did use T, why did they only come up with that originally one time out of 7 or so tests they did on him? And why was he the only rider who tested positive from 2006? There were by my reckoning some 80 odds tests administered, that’s about a 6% rate if you count in the additional positives they came up with on the added B sample testing. If doping is as wide-spread and Jean and Ludwig would have us believe, then WADA would have better results throwing darts at a dartboard.
Just for the record, I never subscribed to the theory that the French concocted some conspiracy to take down yet another American victory; rather what I see from the testimony is that there was a rather loosely run organization, and then a large dose of CYA.
Don’t know what this means..
Armstrong’s ex-wife reportedly cooperating with doping investigation http://goo.gl/fb/vwAww #cyclingnews
austincyclist,
Thanks for the link. Here’s David Walsh’s original story in the Sunday Times of London.
Just read David Walsh’s article. That’s very interesting to read all the other accuser’s experiences with Armstrong, all under oath. Says a lot. I don’t doubt at all what Floyd says about working for Armstrong, or Phonak for that matter (I didn’t before reading this article, but it bolster’s what he’s claiming).
I have a couple questions. First, does anyone know for certain what are the draconian penalties that members of the former Postal team could face? I’m assuming prison and/or fines.
Second, one of the PED’s that Floyd took were female hormones. That’s the first time I’ve ever heard of such substances being a PED–how could they possibly help with endurance? And insulin, isn’t that extremely dangerous for PED use?
Cal, I also saw the comment in Dr. Kay’s April 28 (I think) email where he mentions “our wives”. Could have been a strictly financial divorce as you stated, that would make sense. Amber is one tough survivor.
I think, based on what I recently read about a baseball player, that female fertility drugs, which presumably include hormones, are used to “adjust” an athletes own hormones, including testosterone. In other words, they are used as a masking agent and not specifically as a PED.
Use of insulin can be dangerous – it could lead to hypoglycemia, insulin shock and death. However, doping athletes seem willing to take risks.
Barbara, I have not seen the female hormones identified. But there’s a female hormone called human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) that reportedly can be part of a regimen for athletes doping with testosterone. hCG is a hormone critical in pregnancy, and it’s also used as a female fertility drug. Men naturally produce hCG also, but in very small amounts.
I’d have to do a bit more research to get this right. But athletes who dope with testosterone do so in cycles. When an athlete dopes with testosterone, it interferes with the athlete’s biochemistry, so the athlete is not able to naturally produce much testosterone. When the athlete cycles off the exogenous testosterone, the athlete wants to do what he can to kick-start his natural production of testosterone. Reportedly, hCG is able to do this.
If you follow football and baseball in the U.S., then you may have heard about Manny Ramirez of the L.A. Dodgers, who received a 50-day suspension for using hCG, and Brian Cushing of the Houston Texans, who faces a 4-game suspension for using hCG.
To repeat, I don’t know if Landis has confessed to using hCG.
Plowing through these comments. I have a couple of thoughts.
First, as far as collecting money for the fund, he collected that money to fight an anti-doping system that was deeply flawed, and that hasn’t changed at all. I watched the science closely, and IMHO he was just randomly selected to demonstrate a functioning system, which in fact doesn’t function at all. That’s unjust and worth fighting.
Second to the people that cast his lies in a different class than your lies and my lies: I’m a parent. And I’ve realized that one of the most important duties of a parent is to keep kids from making the really big mistakes in life, like unplanned pregancy, substance addiction, and driving while intoxicated.
And what I’ve realized is, that when we make the big mistakes in life, the real problem is that they are EXACTLY like all the little mistakes we make all the time. Getting behind the wheel of a car “just this once” is something that many of us have done, and it’s not a significantly different choice than choosing to eat too much desert.
It’s easy to say we wouldn’t do the same. I’m willing to say it, if I was offered, I wouldn’t do it. There, I said it. But the reality is that these things don’t happen like that. If I experienced all the things that Floyd experienced for a long time, it’s incredibly crass to really say that I’m positive I wouldn’t make his choices.
Wrong decisions at ANY level can feel totally normal and reasonable when you make them, even when you are fully aware that they’re wrong. Some of the choices have serious, long-term consequences, but most of them don’t. Human beings really suck at telling the difference.
tom
Some good thought, Thomas, both in regards the situation under discussion here and life in general.
Guilty or not, Landis had every right to try to defend himself, even if that might have potentially involved “beating the rap on a technicality”. I suspect that many, maybe even most of us would do the same thing if called to account for something, whether at work, in criminal court, or perhaps by the spouse or SO.
I would like to be able to say that, if I had been good enough to land a position as a pro cyclist, I would have declined to take any PEDs, but one never really knows until you get there.
I would bet you, oh, I don’t know, how about $625 (!), that the MAJORITY of people (say 90% or more) did NOT give money to the FFF merely to “fight an anti-doping system that was deeply flawed”. (Seriously?!) They gave the money TO Floyd because they believed what he was telling them – that he’d NEVER taken a PED & certainly not Testosterone during the Tour &/or they thought the lab made errors on his test AND they gave money because they just could NOT believe a guy they admired would ASK for & ACCEPT it if he was lying.
And sure, he had the RIGHT to “defend” himself. But WITHOUT MY FREAKIN MONEY. Or the money of all the other naive, hopeful supporters.
To compare Floyd’s lies to get that money to the lies the rest of us may tell is ridiculous. Or as delusional as Dr Kay.
That ANY of you think Floyd is confessing to CLEAR his “conscience” or “ease his burden” (God, Floyd, got that script down, doncha), then you still don’t see that the guy is a sociopath. The LAST thing he cares is about is other people. He just now wants to hurt as many people or cycling organizations as he can.
Anyway, at least I am now FREE of spending even one more second worrying about “poor Floyd”.
I do know my enjoyment of watching the sport has once again been adversely affected. And whether I can stomach watching the sport attempt to destroy itself AGAIN during the next several months is doubtful. For all of you who have been waiting for this &/or enjoy it, then yippee for you. But you better go after LeMond too. One of his arguments has been that LA couldn’t have beat all those confessed dopers ‘legally’. Well, Fignon confessed last year. So, GREG – I’m waiting for YOUR CONFESSION. And for that, I’d join the bonfire. Hell, I’ll even sing “Kumbayah”.
Speaking only for myself, I gave money to the FFF because:
Had I known that Landis was doping, but perhaps not with testosterone, I’m honestly not certain whether I would have donated to the FFF. Probably not. I’m not a big fan of finessing the system.
That said, I do think Floyd’s case illustrated some of the dark underbelly of the current system, and the problems that have come to light still need to be corrected. So, to that end, the money I donated wasn’t a total loss.
Though I’m married to a psychologist, I’m reluctant to armchair psychologize. If Floyd has issues to work out, I hope he’s getting good professional help. Perhaps what we’re seeing is a result of such an effort. But that’s mere speculation on my part.
I’m sorry to see his story take this turn. To me, it illustrates the choices athletes in all sports face. Everyone has their natural limits in sport. Some do better than others. When technology or drugs exist that can extend individuals’ abilities, some (many?) make the choice to use the drugs or technology, even when it is against the rules. It’s a shame when people succumb to the siren song of temptation.
Landis’ case strikes me as a tragedy, in the Shakespearean sense. Perhaps that’s a bit of hyperbole, but more and more, it keeps looking that way.
Is this a hypodermic needle which I see before me,
The syringe toward my hand? Come, let me clutch thee.
I have thee not, and yet I see thee still.
Art thou not, fatal vision, sensible
To feeling as to sight? or art thou but
A dagger of the mind, a false creation,
Proceeding from the heat-oppressed brain?
I see thee yet, in form as palpable
As this which now I draw.
Thou marshall’st me the way that I was going;
And such an instrument I was to use.
Mine eyes are made the fools o’ the other senses,
Or else worth all the rest; I see thee still,
And on thy blade and dudgeon gouts of blood,
Which was not so before. There’s no such thing:
It is the bloody business which informs
Thus to mine eyes. Now o’er the one halfworld
Nature seems dead, and wicked dreams abuse
The curtain’d sleep; witchcraft celebrates
Pale Hecate’s offerings, and wither’d murder,
Alarum’d by his sentinel, the wolf,
Whose howl’s his watch, thus with his stealthy pace.
With Tarquin’s ravishing strides, towards his design
Moves like a ghost. Thou sure and firm-set earth,
Hear not my steps, which way they walk, for fear
Thy very stones prate of my whereabout,
And take the present horror from the time,
Which now suits with it. Whiles I threat, he lives:
Words to the heat of deeds too cold breath gives.
[A bell rings]
I go, and it is done; the bell invites me.
Hear it not, Lance; for it is a knell
That summons thee to heaven or to hell.
Macbeth seems quite appropriate, eh Mr. eightzero?
Act IV, Scene I
Round about the cauldron go;
In the poison’d entrails throw.
Toad, that under cold stone
Days and nights hast thirty one
Swelter’d venom sleeping got,
Boil thou first i’ the charmed pot.
Double, double toil and trouble;
Fire burn and cauldron bubble.
Fillet of a fenny snake,
In the cauldron boil and bake;
Eye of newt, and toe of frog,
Wool of bat, and tongue of dog,
Adder’s fork, and blind-worm’s sting,
Lizard’s leg, and howlet’s wing,
For a charm of powerful trouble,
Like a hell-broth boil and bubble.
Doping is much more than doing something that is ‘against the rules’; it’s creating a grossly unfair advantage over your peers. This is the part that I think EVERYONE is missing here. This is about sports – yes, sports, that arena which, for better or worse, is looked upon by children and adults as a place to find heroes. I agree that hero-worship is a dangerous thing, but like it or not, athletes are looked up to by the younger ones of the population, and therefore they ARE held to a higher standard.
I think the decision to dope or not to dope is two-fold: First, it seems to offer hope for one to improve his or her abilities. Second, and more damaging, it allows you a critical edge over the competition, essentially rigging the game. By his own admission (which I’m inclined to believe, at least part of it) he’s been doing this for most of his professional career; READ: Rigging the game for most of his career.
The emails: I’m still trying to sort through the meanings, but I have to agree with those who’ve stated that it seems Landis was trying to ‘nudge’ (persuade) the powers that be into allowing him to race in the ToC. The timing is just too perfect – it seems that when he was denied, he figured he’d play his card – and just at the edge of the summer racing season as well, when it’d get the most exposure. At this point, can anyone really blame him? If he is genuinely trying to get straight with the record, he would by necessity HAVE to bring others in with him. That part doesn’t surprise me.
I’m afraid that things are not going to go well for Armstrong. Within a matter of days the swirl of speculation gets faster and faster and more and more evidence is resurfaced – the outcome I foresee? The lowest ratings yet for the Tour de France, or an ‘Out With The Incumbents’-type public reaction which wants NOTHING to do with this 30-40-something generation of cyclists.
I admit to being very curious to know what unfolds over the next few weeks.
This quote from Bonnie Ford’s ESPN article is:
“I don’t feel guilty at all about having doped. I did what I did because that’s what we [cyclists] did and it was a choice I had to make after 10 years or 12 years of hard work to get there, and that was a decision I had to make to make the next step. My choices were, do it and see if I can win, or don’t do it and I tell people I just don’t want to do that, and I decided to do it.”
uxbunny – I read this to mean if he was to compete as a CAT 1 rider on the elite professional tour he had to decide to dope. He had worked hard for 10-12 years and now had a decision to make. In order to make it at that level, either he doped or he decided not to ride at that level. I do not see it as having an unfair advantage. In the scope of things, I understand what you are saying, but if the decision is, I will dope therefore I will ride at this level or no I will not dope and I will not ride at that level then it really is not an unfair advantage. Everyone is doing it, therefore it really is a level playing field.
Uxbunny,
From where I see it, all forms of cheating are attempts to rig the game. Whether that’s through doping, or “illegal” equipment like bikes that are lighter than the UCI’s minimum weight, catching a ride on the subway in a marathon, or hitching a ride on a train during the 1904 Tour, it’s all cheating. To be sure, doping is more expensive, both in money and potential health side effects, but it’s cheating all the same.
Doping may give athletes a critical edge on their competition, depending on the prevalence of drug use. If everyone dopes, then what separates one athlete from another is his or her budget –and whether they are skillful in beating the testers. For those who can’t afford the big budget programs, I can see the unfairness. (Not that I’m suggesting it’s a good idea to dope.)
The decision to dope (or to cheat in other ways) is, as you point out, a multi-fold question. But I see it a bit differently. First, is the athlete willing to do whatever it takes, including use drugs, in order to win? Second, is the athlete willing to risk his or here health — or life — for the “glory” of winning? Third, is the athlete willing to risk public humiliation if caught?
My impression is the same as Cal’s — that Landis had to decide whether he wanted to play in the big leagues and do what was necessary (meaning dope). As much as I hate to think it could be true, maybe Ludwig and Jean C are closer to the truth — it may not be that all top cyclists from a certain era doped, but more and more it looks like a whole lot of them did.
What Susie B said. Again.
We can tell ourselves that our involvement in the Landis case was not about Landis, that it was really about how much we care for due process, or for how important it is that PED testing is conducted with scientific precision. Come on! If what we care about is good science, don’t you think we would have focused on a more pressing problem, like global warming or preventing oil spills? If what we really care about is due process, don’t you think we would have found a more important miscarriage of justice, like a death penalty case or a violation of basic human rights?
What we cared about, at its heart, was the person of Floyd Landis. That’s why we got involved. We found his story compelling, and that was the hook that pulled us all in. Some of us thought he was innocent. Some of us may have had doubts about his innocence, but we cared enough about the guy that we wanted to see him treated fairly.
It was “personal”, as they say.
It’s silly now to pretend that Floyd’s revelations do not cut to the heart of why we assembled here at RYHO, and at TBV. I can assure you, if Floyd had told his current version of the truth from the outset, I never would have become involved.
Yes, it’s true, some of us grew to care about the issues underlying Landis’ case, in a way that’s separate from how we cared about Landis the person. But once again, it’s just not right to pretend that the issues are separable from the person of Floyd Landis. Perhaps in some dry and intellectual way, we can see the Landis case and the person of Landis as distinct. But the issue and the person are not distinct at their emotional core. The failures of the leader of a cause are always connected up to the validity of the cause itself. That’s just the way life works. Landis is now a confessed liar and fraud, and his confession is a serious blow to the cause of fair treatment for athletes accused of doping.
As for this business of Landis facing doping as a life decision — I don’t believe it for a minute. The Landis quote makes it sound like Landis raced clean for 10-12 years, and then sat down under a tree somewhere to contemplate which direction (racing clean versus racing on PEDs) he would take for the rest of his life. Nonsense.
There was no such moment. The more likely story is that Landis entered cycling with a determination to do whatever it took to be the best, and doping was a part of what it took (or what he thought it took) to be the best. His decision to dope was probably driven by the same consideration he took in selecting his bicycle — he did whatever he thought made him go the fastest.
Ditto for the notion that Landis just doped to keep up with everyone else. That’s nonsense. Maybe everyone WAS doping, we’ll never know. But there’s nothing about Landis’ nature that would lead me to believe he’d just dope in an average way. Landis’ drive to succeed would have caused him to dope in a way that was head and shoulders above the crowd. There is nothing in the cocktail of PEDs that Landis reported he used — including stuff like female growth hormone — to indicate that Landis was just trying to use the minimum stuff to keep up with everyone else.
We need to understand Landis’ words in the way he probably meant them: he’s not sorry he doped, because he has no regret that he tried his hardest to win races.
Larry,
I agree, the thing that hooked me into following Floyd’s case was Floyd. And, as a journalist, the feeling that the mainstream press hadn’t done a great job covering his story at the beginning. It seemed to me like a potentially innocent person was getting shafted by the sports establishment, including the sports media.
The more I followed the story, the more I learned about Floyd and his background and the test results, the more I believed he was telling the truth.
So it’s a huge disappointment to find out otherwise. If I knew then what we know now, I highly doubt I have gotten involved. To play devil’s advocate for a moment, assume he really didn’t use testosterone before Stage 17, as he claims. In fighting the charges, he was telling a small truth that hid a bigger untruth.
Of course, if he was using testosterone during the 2006 Tour, then he was flat-out lying the whole time. At this point I really don’t know which to believe.
At some point in his cycling career, he ran into the question of whether to dope or not. I rather doubt that he started doping at the very beginning when he was a young proto-mountain biker. Whenever that was, before or after he joined the Postal Service team, in trying as hard as he could to succeed, he chose to dope.
His regimen, from what I’ve seen, sounds pretty standard as far as what cyclists at that level are said to do. Still, I believe he put every ounce of energy into being the best racer he could be, by all means at his disposal.
One question I’d like to see answered is whether it was part of the job requirement coming on board he Postal Service squad. Were they all expected to dope? Was a systematic program in place?
Having arrived at his point, I fully understand why folks are furious with him. There was some good that came out of all this, at least from my perspective. But I’ll grant you, virtually everyone initially got involved (on either side of the discussion) because for whatever reasons, we found Floyd’s story compelling. And because we cared, in a deeply emotional way, we’re upset by how this ultimately turned out.
I was clearly drawn into this affair because of Floyd. I would not have nearly as much interest if it was a cyclist from Australia. I happen to reside in Lancaster County, PA where Landis is from and have many personal connections to his family and family friends.
However, I read Landis’ words differently that you do Larry. I read them as, “I do not feel guilty for doping because most if not all are doping.” He says, “That is what we do (cyclists).” It was not a decision he made in one moment, but one made over time as he experienced the culture. In order to make it, he decided to go along. That is how I read it. I do admit that I have changed my viewpoint. Most, if not all cyclists have been doping. Not sure if it is changing today or not.
Another realization is that there is not such a thing as a person who you want to totally emulate. People have good characteristics and bad characteristics. One person has characteristics worth learning about and the same person has things one does not need to learn about or may desire to do the exact opposite. The negative ones do not totally negate the positive ones. This is not all or nothing. I have known this, but allowed my personal connections to cloud my better judgment in this situation.
It is definitely an intriguing life drama. The story itself is compelling. I do not harbor this righteous anger which Larry and Susie B. have. It is not worth it to me. I was clearly gullible and I accept responsibility for that. Getting my $25, plus the cost of the book or the Tour tape will not make me feel any better. Susie B – If us Rant readers take an offering and reimburse you the $600+ will you feel better? Why would it feel better if Landis reimbursed you?
Another point for me. Contrition is overrated. I decide to feel better about someone else’s apology because of his/her contrition? If that is what I decide, it gives control of my own emotions and choices to someone else. I decide what I need and I go for it. I decide what I will do to release my own emotions and then act upon it. I do not want to be dependent upon another’s actions to help me determine how to move forward.
This journey has been worth it to me. I do not like the fact that Landis lied and cheated, but I accept responsibility for my own choices. Those choices brought me much more pleasure than the actual money I spent. I personally spent time with and learned to know folks through this experience. I have absolutely no regreat about that.
Cal, every cheat and crook uses the excuse that “everyone is doing it”, or the companion excuse that some were doing worse. It’s a truism, whether we’re talking about doping in cycling, or cheating on your taxes, or organized crime, or worse: the guy who is caught can complain with some justification that he’s being punished for the same activity that others are getting away with.
It’s also the case that the guy who complains that “everyone is doing it” is probably “doing it” on a larger scale than most everyone else. There’s a reason that one guy is caught and the other guy gets away unpunished. The guy who is caught may be unlucky, or singled out because of some form of bigotry, but often the guy who’s caught is the guy who cheats the worst or the most often.
Landis is not a stupid guy. He understood that if he doped, there was a chance he’d get caught. He also knew that the ADAs were not able to catch all the dopers. Before 2006, he was the guy (well, one of the guys) who got away with doping while other guys got caught. In 2006, he was the guy who got caught doing what other guys were getting away with. Too bad. That was the risk he took when he started doping.
What I think Landis is REALLY saying is: “I took the rap for what we were all doing, and in exchange for my keeping silent about what I knew about doping, I expected to be taken care of once my suspension was over.” It’s like an organized crime movie — isn’t this how “Goodfellas” ended?
Just read the new (date says today, but also says archive, maybe I missed the full-interview portion before) ESPN from B.Ford. Definitely makes you understand his perspective.. Interesting that had he gotten a pro-tour team.. the cat would not be out of the bag today.
http://bit.ly/96sAiL
The saddest thing to read about was David Witt death towards the end..
One question I have.. did he dope at all after 2006.. during his time on Ouch or even Bah Fnd?
Hi, did something happen? I went to the bike race, and it was a lot of fun, but a bike race is the last place you go for information about the world of cycling, or even what’s going on in the bike race. This will be on velonews.com, right?
Still a lot of interesting comments and things to think about.
I did not give any money to the FFF, though I did hope he was innocent. I still don’t think they proved he was guilty, he just finally admitted he was, whether he was for what they specifically charged him of or not. I’m disappointed, but I’d still buy susie b’s stuff, if I could afford to. But like I said, I didn’t give Floyd my money. He’s not the first rider I’ve liked to be busted, and I’m sure he wont be the last.
Maybe I’m just getting older, but I’m starting to suspect that pretty much everyone in the top level of professional athletes is taking something they’re not supposed to be. There’s just too much money involved. And I wouldn’t be surprised if the sporting organizations are willing to only pay lip service to combating doping. Impressive athletic performances mean more fans and more money. Though the true fan would watch anyway.
Look at the AP’s choice for the NFL’s defensive rookie of the year. After voting him the award the NFL suspended him for 4 games for using PEDs. The AP revoted and still gave the award to him.
As for speculation on what Floyd is feeling or what’s true and what’s lies, I have no idea. Smoke keeps appearing around the Armstrong camp though. And as for what Floyd is feeling, the whole point behind the “walk a mile in someone’s shoes” expression is that you can’t. I don’t know what he is thinking or feeling. Yes, the emails look like he wanted into the ToC. Not surprised by that. There was no big evidence of threats though like Lance claims.
And maybe with doping the ones with the most money win. But to think that taking doping out of that equation leaves a perfect playing field where money doesn’t influence the outcome is crazy. I watch sports to be entertained. I want the contest to be as fair as possible, but sports are like life. Not everything is fair. Some teams have more money, better equipment or a better organization behind them. Referee’s biases enter into their calls. Teams with larger fan bases are give preferential treatment. All these things happen but I still enjoy my sports.
Kind of rambled a bit but anyway, I know that even with PEDs I could have never competed at that level. And I’ll still watch cycling. Just wish they’d all get their shit together.
The argument that Floyd is making is that so many people are doping that it’s not a matter of gaining an advantage, so much as keeping up with the Joneses. You can’t keep up with anyone if you don’t dope, you can only have a fair shot if you do dope. Essentially, the real rules of cycling were different than the written ones.
I’ve been reluctant to accept this excuse in the past, because I’ve always wanted to believe that only a minority of cyclists doped. I’ve made this argument many times. But there’ve been a lot of little stories in the last couple of years, to the point where I’m prepared to accept that Floyd might be right here. And also, it’s much harder to dismiss Floyd’s claims, even though I’ve dismissed others’ claims, because I’m much more familiar (in a public persona way) with him than others.
Larry, I agree that Landis basically said explicitly, that he’d be willing to continue living the lie if it meant he could return to Euro cycling. He was quite direct on that.
tom
Does anyone know the history of the relationship of UCI and WADA related to Landis’ claims about Lance making a monetary payment to keep his positive drug test silent? In other words some folks discredit this because WADA gets the test results independently and would not have allowed this to occur.
This graph http://www.wada-ama.org/en/About-WADA/History/WADA-History/ seems to show in 2001 WADA was in such infancy that the system we have today was not really in place. It was not until 2004 that all Federations adopted the WADA code.
I guess I am looking for specific facts to either support Landis’ claims regarding a 2001/2002 positive test for Armstrong or refute it. What is the history of when UCI and the current WADA system would have been implemented?
As you say, WADA existed in 2002, and they were running tests. But national federations and sports federations were also both running their own tests independent of WADA. Despite better organization, this is still somewhat true today.
At any rate, I would think that the bulk of the tests during the 2002 Tour de Suisse would have been UCI tests, not WADA tests.
Maybe a search of news archives could provide more information?
tom
austincyclist,
Having read through Bonnie Ford’s transcript, I believe Landis said he has not doped during his comeback.
“Hey White LIAR
The truth comes out a little at a time
And it spreads just like a fire
Slips off of your tongue like turpentine
And I don´t know why
White LIAR
You better be careful what you do
I wouldn´t wanna be in your shoes
Now that the “truth” is out
You better be careful what you say
It never really added up any way
You got NO friends in my town”
Some hang with “Will”, I’ll go with Miranda Lambert. That “white liar” now has a WHOLE new meaning for me just means I’ll sing along with even more gusto in the car.
I believe that WADA and/or UCI have stated that it would not have been possible to bribe one’s way out of an AAF since there would be records and too many people would know about it. Then there is the fact that Landis seems to have said this was the 2002 TdS, but LA didn’t compete in it that year; he did in 2001. I saw one comment, I think it was on the Walsh article linked above, that what Landis was saying was that he learned about this in 2002, but I haven’t seen an exact quote to confirm or deny that. In any case, if this allegation is true, whether or not there is any hard evidence to confirm it is hard to say. Until such evidence is forthcoming, I don’t think we need to put much into this. And I don’t think that whatever agency was responsible for the testing them will spend much effort investigating these charges.
As to his other allegations of doping by LA et al, in the Bonnie Ford interview he specifically states that he has not evidence to support his claims. It is possible that he might be able to point to someone that does and/or his keeping mum about what details he can support so as to not tip off those accused, who can then either destroy evidence (which they might do now anyway) or otherwise counter his claims.
His diaries might have information that WADA etc. could find useful in seeing how he was able to avoid detection for so long.
“As to his other allegations of doping by LA et al, in the Bonnie Ford interview he specifically states that he has not evidence to support his claims. It is possible that he might be able to point to someone that does ”
Can you say “non-analytical positive” under the WADA rules.
Landis’s allegations are based on his own personal knowledge, things he witnessed himself or doping admissions that were made to him by the allegedly guilty party.
This type of evidence was enough to “convict” Tim Montgomery and Marion Jones, neither of whom tested positive.
If the feds get involved and start asking questions of the accused or those with knowledge (e.g., Lance’s wife), the pressure to tell the truth will be increased. Lying to a federal officer, even if not under oath, is a felony. This pressure is what got Marion Jones to confess.
I don’t think lying to anti-doping officials is a felony, but I could be wrong.
Cal, I understand what you’re saying, but I think we just disagree. The ‘everyone is doing it’ defense is key – it’s the kind of thing that divides the good from the bad. People of some virtue take the other road and just say no, OR say ‘you know what? This is corrupt and I’m not going to have a part in it.’ Rant, I know that you agree with Cal on this point, but ultimately if it’s the cycling teams that are setting the standard for what is morally correct (in terms of sport) then we’ve found our ‘Starchamber’ – the teams themselves. Who knew we’d end up here, having to apply the same critical eye to the very teams themselves with the harshness that was previously only dedicated to UCI and other members of the alphabet soup.
Larry, I agree with nearly all you’ve said – I did notice a trend that some people here were trying to distance themselves from their actual support for Floyd as a person. I mean, hey, I can understand that (who wants to admit that they championed a liar?, better yet, that they dedicated hours and hours of writing to support a liar?) I think it’s all just part of the fall-out.
Suzie, I totally understand your anger, and for those who want to offer Suzie money to placate her, you’re totally missing the point: It’s about Floyd working, saving and writing the checks, just the way any of us would have to do.
Agreeing with Cal, I hate excessive contrition… how many times and one say ‘I’m sorry’ to make it ‘mean more’? To me it’s always a matter of context – why is someone sorry? Floyd supporters will either be satisfied with his level of contrition or not, it really doesn’t matter. With the pace that this story is moving, that’s actually old news.
m,
I was thinking the same thing, regarding non-analytical positives. Landis’ training diaries and first-hand accounts might be enough for an arbitration panel to rule against other cyclists. I suspect we’ll be seeing that put to the test at some point in the future.
I doubt that lying to anti-doping officials is a felony. Lying to federal agent like Jeff Novitzky, on the other hand, would be. And if the Feds really are looking into what Landis has to say, as the rumors suggest, there are a few people who might oughtta be nervous.
uxbunny,
I agree. Who knew the story would end up here? As far as distancing myself from Floyd, that’s not really my intention. I stood up for something and someone that I believed in. No shame in that.
I’m more than embarrassed that I got it wrong, but the hours writing weren’t a waste. I learned more than I ever wanted to know about how the anti-doping system really works. Regardless of Floyd’s case, what I learned from all this is that the system really doesn’t work all that well, and it needs a whole lot of improvement.
Also, I got the chance to write a book that was published, and even though it hasn’t flown off the shelves, that wouldn’t have happened without writing this blog. And, I’ve gotten to interact with you and everyone else who posts here. Wouldn’t trade that for the world. The jousting has been fun, and I hope it continues.
Many riders, once busted, have pointed fingers at other riders, as well as DSes and other team officials. To the best of my knowledge, nothing have ever come of this. So what is different about Landis’ finger pointing? He admits he has no evidence, and that the info in his diaries is just about his use. So I don’t see that there’s much chance that anything official will happen, just because of Landis’ allegations.
Now, it may be that he can point WADA etc. to people who do have evidence. We’ll just have to see how things play out.
uxbunny,
I think you missed my point. I will be much more direct in order to make my point more clear.
1. It is up to an individual to take control of their emotions whatever those emotions are.
2. An individual needs to define those emotions and define what is within his/her control to do with those emotions.
3. Do not give anyone elses actions control of your emotions. Do not abdicate that control or responsibility to anyone else.
With these in mind, I have no interest in placating anyone. In fact I will not be giving any of you money to reimburse you what you put out to support Floyd. Each person feels what he/she feels and is responsible for those feelings.
If it is about Floyd paying you back, what are you going to do to take responsiblity for your feelings. Are you gonna whine, write about it, harbor anger and resentment until he finally pays you back? Don’t give him anymore control over your life. If you are going to need to sue him to make your point, then get off your arse and do it. If you need to write on Rant your Head off 5 straight days that he is a scumbag, then do it and decide what you are going to do with your feelings.
My point is, “Every individual is responsible for his/her well-being and needs to accept that responsibility.” Define what you need and go get it. Do not allow anyone elses actions to define your mental health and well-being.
Go for it, but be clear about what you are going for.
“Many riders, once busted, have pointed fingers at other riders,….”
Tim Montgomery was found by CAS to have doped based solely on the testimony of fellow athlete (and admitted doper) Kelli White, who said Montgomery admitted using the “clear” a Balco drug.
However, Montgomery did not testify at the USADA hearing, so the White testimony was un-controverted. Maybe because he feared perjuring himself.
So will Lance testify? Will his wife testify? If they don’t then it will just be Landis’s testimony.
M, I doubt there’s going to be any testimony. The reaction to Landis so far from the anti-doping crowd seems unusually muted. IOC President Rogge: “He has to bring proof that this is true … you can’t condemn without proof … his is risking a lot of libels … [they need] more evidence than just an email.” WADA President Fahey: “If he has evidence, he should make that evidence available to the USADA or UCI … there will always be rumors about it.” So far, USA Cycling and USADA have declined comment.
I’ve read that the head of the French anti-doping lab felt vindicated by Landis’ confession — apparently, the French did not get the memo that Landis has not confessed to the PED use found by the French lab.
There is reportedly interest from “federal authorities”, but if the folks who run cycling (and cycling anti-doping) consider Landis to be credible, they’re keeping it to themselves.
Larry,
Perhaps you’re right, and the various federations and agencies won’t go after anyone Landis names. The UCI is certainly beginning what appears to be a whitewash, with the story coming out that they don’t consider what Landis has to say about John LeLangue being credible. Really? Without at least making a show of doing an investigation?
USADA and WADA, I’m not so sure. Lance is the Great White Whale of the anti-doping agencies’ dreams. If they think Landis can help land the big fish, they may actually do something, despite their publicly tepid responses.
Not sure about the Novitzky angle. Novitzky’s a pitbull who, once he latches onto an investigation, doesn’t let go. If there is something there, he may well find it.
What “it” is, I’m not sure. But woe unto anyone who lies to Novitzky and his ilk. Marion Jones is a good example of the consequences.
I know I’m a wee bit late to this conversation, but I don’t keep the closest tabs on the Landis story any more and I only check in on RYHO every couple of months.
Like so many here, I dedicated many hours reading and commenting on this issue here and on TBV. I even published a series of articles on my site about the science of the matter. Like so many, I did end up donating to the FFF ($50) and have my signed Landis photo as my “thank you”.
For me this whole affair from start to end has really ruined my ability to enjoy watching professional cycling. What I have come to believe is that doping isn’t limited to a few rogue riders. It is a systemic problem and the entire cycling organization from the athlete to the support personnel through the sponsors and the alphabet soup of governing bodies are all culpable. The entire system is rotten to the core. Are there clean cyclists, yes I’m sure they are, but we’ll never know who they really are.
What was painfully clear from Landis’s appeal process and everything that has happened since is that the cycling m.o. is “go along to get along”. The truth is that Landis’s real “sin” wasn’t that he doped; it wasn’t even that he got “caught”. It was that had the nerve to nerve to use the appeal process rather than taking his “punishment” like a good little cyclist. Had Landis taken his suspension and kept his mouth shut he would be racing today. But no, Landis fought back and put up a legitimate defense that exposed the dark underbelly of the alphabet soup that runs cycling and controls the fate of cyclists, clean and otherwise.
Landis has now admitted to using PEDs throughout his career but still maintains he didn’t use “T” during the TdF in 2006. I don’t know if he did or didn’t. What I do know is that the science and the testing procedures used to catch him were deeply flawed. Even if Landis was doing PEDs, the system did not catch him over a number of years for PEDs he admits to having done. At the same time, it still may have falsely accused him of having done a specific PED when he hadn’t done that one.
It isn’t enough to say well he was doing something illegal and he got what he deserved. The science and processes behind the system have to be right. A system that catches cheats via flawed science and procedures is unacceptable because it WILL also result in the conviction of innocent individuals (assuming there are some top level competitors that don’t dope).
To be credible and fair, any drug testing regime, whether for PEDs in sports or recreational drugs in the work place, MUST be completely transparent, with the most rigorous chain of custody procedures, using only peer reviewed science for the tests and separate testing labs must be used for A and B samples. The tests conducted on Landis’s samples failed in all of these counts. The chain of custody was broken, the science behind the tests was not peer reviewed and the same lab handled both samples.
I have worked in occupations that required random drug testing (federally mandated) as a condition of employment AND I’ve been in a position where I had to send employees for random drug testing. In these cases a failed drug test wouldn’t have been some two year suspension, it would have been career ending. The mere possibility there might have been the slightest chance of there having been a false positive is a very scary thought. We absolutely depended upon there being absolutely no chance of a false positive. The science and procedures had to be beyond reproach. I will never look at drug testing the same way again as a result of the Landis case.
The other day I was talking with someone who happened to work for a drug testing lab about the Landis case. I explained how the CoC had been broken and how the same lab tested both samples. She was horrified that both samples were tested by the same lab as it was a clear conflict of interest.
Did Landis take “T”? I don’t know and if he truly didn’t, we’ll never know for sure. However, given the gross negligence of the testing procedures he should have been exonerated, the testing lab shut down and WADA forced to do a complete overhaul of systems from top to bottom. Yes maybe Landis would have gotten off on a technicality, but those “technicalities” are what is necessary to ensure innocent racers aren’t wrongly accused.
In my opinion, cycling is one of the most beautify sports to watch. Unfortunatly my enjoyment of watching cycling has been ruined by a corrupt system that rewards the “go along to get along” silence and the institutionalized doping with window dressing procedures that give lip service to actually addressing the issue.
On the Lance Armstrong issue, I don’t know what to think, but where there is smoke there is normally fire and Lance has had way too many “disgruntled” former “employees”.
—
P.S. Over the next week or so, I’ll work on getting caught up to date with the rest of Rants rants as well as everyone’s comments (it took me two days off and on to read all the comments above).