Days Of Reflection

by Rant on September 21, 2007 · 12 comments

in Doping in Sports, Floyd Landis, Tour de France

A few days ago, when my wife and I were talking about when the Floyd Landis decision would come down, it occurred to me that it would be a strange bit of karma if the decision were announced between sundown Friday and sundown Saturday. Why? Because this is Yom Kippur, the Day of Atonement. The day to fast, pray, and to contemplate the course of our lives in the last year. That it comes so soon after the arbitration panel announced their findings in the Landis case is an odd sort of juxtaposition.

Yom Kippur is a heavy day, fraught with all sorts of meaning. If I were observant, I would be in a synagogue right now, praying and fasting and reflecting on my actions during the last year. But I don’t have to be in a synagogue to do any of that. I can reflect on things right here, too.

It’s also a time for reflection for Floyd Landis and his family. A time to decide what to do, and which path to take from here. The decisions he faces are not to be made lightly, they should be well considered, well reasoned. They should be what’s best for him and his family.

Not what I think. Not what you think. Not what any of us thinks. What’s right for Floyd and Amber and Ryan. That’s what matters.

It’s time to lay low. Time to stay out of the limelight. Time to ride a bike. Time to heal whatever might need healing. Time to take it easy. Time to figure out what’s next.

In the tradition I grew up in, on this day one is supposed to ask forgiveness of those you might have harmed (though usually not so publicly). So, to Floyd, I say this: I hope that in speaking out on your behalf, I haven’t inadvertently caused you any harm. It’s always been done with the best of intentions, from that well-cultivated Rant sense of outrage at how you’ve been treated in the last year.

May the coming year be better for all of us than the year that’s gone by.

Morgan Hunter September 21, 2007 at 11:11 pm

Rant – I want to state unequivocally in this public forum that my support of Floyd Landis does not hinge on whether Floyd will continue fighting this present system or not. Floyd Landis WON the 2006 TdeF — my own eyes tell me this as I was watching it happen.

Ironic as it may be, Floyd “lost his title” — while the system is set up NOT to find out the truth but rather to prove that the laboratory testing and procedures and the present “governing” bodies are to be ACCEPTED as the last word in finding the accused athlete “guilty” — and that NO ONE, especially the athlete is “allowed” to dispute this.

I for one do not think it sensible for Floyd to keep on fighting in a “fixed” pseudo “court system” that is designed to drain the resources of the defendant, making it nothing more then an exercise in futility.

I whole-heartedly agree with you Rant, it is now the time for Floyd to consider his own private life. Floyd and his wife and his daughter have undergone an ordeal that cannot – not impacted their lives. It is with no pleasure that my loyalty and belief in Floyd may have been a small part in their tragedy. I believe Floyd Landis has accomplished a very great thing — he has “opened” the doors to activity in the present cycling governing bodies that needs to be addressed — BUT I do not think or feel that Floyd needs to continue fighting windmills simply to “prove” that he is innocent. Given what slim chance at litigation the present system “appears” to offer, is it wise to do so.

Sadly, I have no suggestions as to how Floyd should or will continue his life as a pro cyclist. The BURDEN TO CHANGE this flawed system does not rest on Floyds’ shoulders anymore. He has done his job and as far as I can see, he has invested, did the work, walked the walk and has dearly “paid in full” the responsibility to get fair justice. The rest is on the shoulders of the PUBLIC/FANS of cycling.

There will be many who simply want to see this whole episode in cycling history as a question of “did he or did he not” dope. To these people I would like to point out — THIS IS THE REAL SIGNIFICANCE of the Landis trial — given what has transpired — can you honestly make such a decision clearly and fairly? I do not think this is possible. The question of Floyd doping or not – cannot be answered. Once again, I do not think that Floyd doped. YES this is a completely “faith” based stance, but it is the one I choose to stand on.

If I were an active member of the UCI racing fraternity — I would right now be BURNING my club membership license! Why would I want to be a member of an organization that uses every “grand feat” of achievement as a sign of cheating? I would walk away and keep on riding because I love riding. If I could find a “race” that is not UCI/WADA/IOC sanctioned — I’d enter and race because ultimately part of the thrill of riding a bicycle is to test myself against others, test myself against the reality of what I feel I can do or not do. Can there be individuals who “cheat” by doping in such races — yeah — I think there would be — is it possible for a rider to beat such people — I believe there is. Because in the final analysis — people can dope to the gills and if their talent is small, their gains will only improve them a little. Does it make my job harder, more complicated, Yeah, it does — I have a choice — I can choose not to race. But to be honest — the pleasure of beating a doper is sweeter because he is doping and I know I DON’T NEED TO.

Like you Rant, I feel a responsibility to championing Floyd in this matter. So to Floyd I just want to say — all respect and hats of to you, your family and the team you had put together. Not continuing this fight — does not diminishes my belief in you or them – not one iota — I am not asking that Floyd and his team waste themselves one tiny bit more in fighting this circus. Floyd, family and legal team has done their part — the rest is up to us to continue. As far as I’m concerned — this fight is not over.

Trislax September 22, 2007 at 7:08 am

I agree with you, Rant, and with Morgan, but I have a different take: If Floyd does not take this to the end, no athlete will ever challenge the crooked system again. Who would? It is clearly rigged, and clearly it does not need to change. To accept the ruling is to accept the faults of the lab, the process, the science-flawed arguements, as acceptible. Floyd needs to take this to the end. I hate to say it, but he will have done nothing to change the system if he stops now. That we know it is flawed is irrelevant if the system itself doesn’t see the flaws. My 2 cents.

*peace*

Larry September 22, 2007 at 8:07 am

Rant, nicely said. A tip of my kippah to you.

Ken September 22, 2007 at 8:22 am

I have to agree with Trislax to an extent. If Floyd stops here there will never be another chance for an innocent athlete to really challenge the crooked system. Instead of fixing itself to be more fair, those in charge will be sure to harden the system against attacks from athlete’s like Floyd. The system will become more crooked, not less. WADA, USADA must be defeated and forced to fix the system for real. Writing to Congress won’t do it, and no amount of writing about how crooked the system is will force it to be fixed. Only a legal vindication of Floyd Landis and a public shaming of USADA and WADA in a court of law will bring about changes.

I can’t contribute a lot financially, but I will contribute what money I can to seeing this fight continued via the Floyd Fairness Fund. I would encourage those who also believe in this cause to give what they can. If people really care about fairness, this could be our best chance to force WADA to be more fair.

Larry September 22, 2007 at 9:19 am

Ken, If Floyd had won the arbitration, would this have forced the ADA system to reform? Perhaps, but more likely not. The ADA reaction would probably have been that FL got off on a technicality, because he had $2MM of legal help, that he cheated and got away with it. The ADA already believes that many cyclists cheat and get away with it. The steps they take in reaction to this situation are varied, some are good steps and some are not, but these steps are never designed to provide greater fairness to the athlete.

Ken, if there’s hope for reform here, it comes from the cycling teams and not from the ADA system. Teams like Slipstream, CSC and T-Mobile conduct their own independent testing programs, and are in a position not only to field clean teams but also to defend riders that are falsely accused.

Cub September 22, 2007 at 9:48 am

I guess I don’t see things the same way that Trislax and Ken do, and I tend to agree with Larry. I think that even if Floyd appealed to CAS and won, it would have little to no affect on the system.

The ruling in the first appeal has set things up so that at best (or worst depending on what side you are on), LNDD will take the fall for screwing up the testing. If Floyd loses the appeal the anti-dopers will say that’s proof the system works. If Floyd wins that’s proof the system works, except that LNDD screwed up and they had to let a doper off the hook.

Unfortunately, I don’t think Floyd is the right person or in the right sport to be able to get a large segment of the public on his side and create public pressure for changing the system.

The reason I say he’s not the right person is because most people, if they care about sports at all, made up their minds about Floyd in the first few weeks after the 2006 TdF when Floyd was (unfairly and incorrectly, IMO) perceived to be making excuses. This seems to be particularly true of people in the sports media (at least here in the USA). You can count the number of sports reporters who show any sympathy toward Floyd on the fingers of one hand (even if, like my grandmother, you’ve had a wood-chopping accident or two).

On top of that, anti-doping hysteria is still on the rise. It’s going to get worse before it gets better. For example, pro golf just caved in to pressure (not sure from whom, but I think mainly the media) to start an anti-doping program. They didn’t want to, they don’t think doping is a problem in their sport, but they feel they had to do it for PR reasons. Of course, they chose not to become involved with the ADAs because they know that would be bad for their sport. I suppose that’s unfortunate. Can you imagine what would happen if golf was in the USADA system and Tiger Woods was put in Floyd’s position?

I believe that if Floyd decides to appeal to CAS, it should be for reasons other than trying to change the system. I think that is beyond his (or any cyclist’s) capabilities at this moment in time.

slapped down September 22, 2007 at 10:59 am

Nice piece Rant, and Morgan, I really agree with your sentiment about continuing to tilt at windmills. Clearly the politics of USADA and WADA are the opposite what they hope to regulate: a level playing field. The system is rigged and perhaps in hind sight this was never a winnable case regardless of the data. It probably is time for Floyd to take his mom’s advice and to get on with his life.
*
One wonders, though, if each of these cases will slowly push the ship onto a different course. Tyler fought his rejection, but did not take it to the public the way Floyd did. What will the next person do? What happens when George or Gary or David get pegged for a violation they did not commit. Is it now expected that they will fight with the vigor of Floyd? And if so, how many times will USADA stomach going back to this same process with the attendant publicity (much of it bad)?
*
I would like to think Floyd did not fight this in vain, that my small donation helped to move the issue out into the open just a little bit. But since my prediction on exoneration was so far off, I dare not predict the overall outcome of this mess: will things improve, will they deteriorate? Will future athletes unjustly accused simply slink away for a two year ban because they know the system is so rigged they will NEVER get a fair review, or instead will they fight with the same intensity they have trained and go after the throat of USADA with claws and teeth? Dunno….
*
But back to Floyd’s mom,after reading her comments on the verdict, I still stick (even more firmly) to the theory that Floyd would not lie to his mom. Maybe to everybody else, but not to his mom. And if he confessed to his mom, she would have outed him in a split second. And he would know that. It doesn’t take a sham trial for me: Floyd didn’t dope ’cause he told his mom he didn’t.

Morgan Hunter September 22, 2007 at 2:02 pm

Trislax — I appreciate your sentiment — but neither you nor I should ask Floyd to continue fighting this farce. Much is made about Floyds’ 2 M dollar defense team — barely a word is mentioned about the difficulty and stresses such a situation places on a person and a family. Even if Floyd raced for another ten years as a pro — what would it get him if it cost him his family? Most everyone that has met Floyd in person, (I have never), say that Floyd is a nice regular guy — ask yourself for just a moment — how much it has cost Floyd to be just a “regular guy” every time he had to be out in public, knowing full well that EVERYTHING he does or says, or doesn’t say will be interpreted one way or another by individuals and the mass media?

I suggest — that NO ONE can really be themselves under such conditions. What do you think being under a microscope for 14 months is like? I wouldn’t want to ask him to keep doing this further. The guy needs time away from the spotlight — he has a lot of decisions to make about himself, about his life, he just needs time to relax and reconnect with himself so he can be what his family loves him for.

Floyd worked at clearing his name — this was I assume the goal for his defense. He was not aiming to “change” the system.

The fact that Floyds’ case has brought to the publics attention what an entirely unbalanced system this doping control system actually is — that the USADA, WADA, UCI feel “no pressure” at the revelations that were brought out is quiet another issue. THIS IS NOT FLOYDS’ JOB OR RESPONSIBILITY TO FIX. — I think it is ours.

I do not agree as to Cubs’ stance that Floyd is not the “right” poster boy for this case. Since the accusation was against him – how could he not be right? The INJUSTICE has been perpetrated on Floyd Landis — he cannot clear his name — personally — I hope that NO ONE EVER forgets the “poster boy” for this issue.

The problem is not “who the poster child is” but rather – realizing that the Landis case is a revelation for all that is rotten in the system. If the powers that be have the power to ignore whatever they choose to ignore – then the only cost effective solution seems to be the “strike” – I do not believe that giving the “teams” a split in control is such a good idea – Since it seems to me that there is quiet a lot of possible “team” involvement in doping – which the Landis case had in no way addressed.

Perhaps I am of the belief that too many cooks in the kitchen spoil the stew. More then likely — I believe that the riders are being treated unfairly — and through the media they are being accused, judged and sentenced. I am frustrated because the powers that be “present themselves” as FAIR and impartial — trying to clean up the sport. Tell me — do you think what has happened in the last 14 months has been a fair trial? A balanced presentation of the facts? I don’t think so.

I think that most people who have kept an open mind have come away with the realization that the system has only one purpose and that is to “bag” every athlete who is suspected of doping — and what is the criterion for this? If you win, or if you prove to be better — you have got to be doping! How “unbiased” is this? I think it sucks!

So if I take this stance – people wish to think that I am “for dopers” — I couldn’t care less — I have never felt that there was no doping going on in our sport — for goodness sakes people – PRO-CYCLING is about money — look around you — people are always cheating to make more of it if they can. Inflammatory statements about the “doping” situation should not empower groups or organizations to subvert the law or to treat individuals in ways that disallows them to get a fair trail! That is nothing less then tyranny!

And finally — consider what the UCI is becoming. If you strip away all the hyperbole and look at all the various melodramas of the past two years — doesn’t it strike you just a wee bit funny that the UCI and the Grand Tours are nothing more then ORGANIZERS playing power games on who gets to run the racing world — and they keep us all distracted by implying that EVERY cyclist is not to be trusted – because deep down — they are all susceptible to turning into cheaters — and sadly many so called cycle fans are ready to buy into this scam — hook line and sinker.

TFF September 22, 2007 at 2:56 pm

I am sad about the verdict, but the fact is that he doped. Quit fooling yourself. It is physiologically impossible for a cyclist who does not dope to compete with one who does, and it is clear that there were plenty around him in that tour who did.

I hope he will take the Jeanson approach and come clean.

Larry September 22, 2007 at 4:00 pm

TFF, you cannot determine whether the charges against FL are true by his performance on the road.

It’s not exactly clear what strategy FL would have been following if the accusations against him were true. At one point, there seemed to be some thought out there that FL had taken some kind of massive dose of testosterone after stage 16 of the 2006 TdF. However, even the test results obtained by the LNDD (results that many of us are not inclined to believe) do not bear out this theory. FL’s exogenous testosterone levels as measured by LNDD were relatively constant throughout the 2006 Tour.

If FL doped, the prevailing thought out there is that he did so using a testosterone patch or gel, which typically provides a relatively low dose of testosterone.

It is true that the use of testosterone can increase muscle strength (see Barry Bonds et. al.), but only when used in large doses over a relatively long period. There’s not much evidence to indicate that the use of low doses of testosterone could aid a rider during a race like the TdF. There’s some evidence to indicate that low doses of testosterone might help a rider hold up during a long race, but that evidence is controversial. In any event, there’s no evidence that the administration of a low dose of testosterone could have contributed in any significant way to FL’s amazing performance in stage 17.

BTW, I’m not a scientist, I just read a lot. The information here on low-dose testosterone is taken from a summary in Scientific American. You can read the study at http://www.sciam.com/askexpert_question.cfm?articleId=84EC9327-E7F2-99DF-3275ED1BD923D659.

As to whether clean riders can compete with riders who dope? Obviously, doping can help raise the performance level of an athlete, particularly if he or she dopes effectively. (I’d argue that in cycling, EPO is effective doping, and low-dose testosterone is relatively ineffective doping, at best.) But it’s impossible to say that doping confers such a significant advantage that clean riders cannot compete.

Are you saying that, if FL doped, he wasn’t doing anything different from any of the other riders he was competing against? If that’s your argument, then I’m sure there are plenty of people who agree with you, and you may be right. I’m not a world-class cyclist (I prefer walking, thank you), so I can’t tell you if you’re right or wrong. My own suspicion (based to some extent on knowing people who know people) is that many if not most of the top riders ride clean.

Rant, could the problems we have posting here be related to the fact that my post times are always around an hour earlier than the time I actually post? I’m in California, so unless you’re in Alaska, something’s wrong somewhere.

Rant September 22, 2007 at 4:58 pm

TFF,

What doping does to help (or not, depending on what they do and how effectively) affects that individual’s performance. Not all athletes are created equal. Some are naturally better than others. Doping may help the not so good compete, or maybe even the excellent compete better. But a mediocre athlete who’s doping is not likely to beat an elite athlete who’s clean.

Larry,

It does have to do with time, but the time displayed is Pacific Standard Time, which my ISP seems to use. There’s some anti-flooding feature to WordPress that is supposed to check current time vs. the last time someone posted. If it’s less than 15 seconds, then the program throws those annoying messages. I tried fixing it the other day, but the fix didn’t take. Guess I need to learn a bit more about PHP programming to get the fix right. I’m working on it. Sorry for the difficulties.

William Schart September 22, 2007 at 5:52 pm

I think that, unfortunately, all the trouble and effort the Landis went through over the past year plus will go for naught,both in terms of his personal situation (barring the rather low chance of a successful appeal) and in terms of improving the present anti-doping system. The basic ruling of the panel was that LNDD was sloppy, but all they have to be is sloppy and that’s good enough. Nothing in the majority statement was directed at any flaws in the process, indeed, some of what we here perceive as flaws in the system were created by the panel (restricting discover to Landis, testing the B samples, etc.). As Cub posted above, WADA etc. can always claim the system if fine, even if LNDD needs to sharpen up.

And let’s face it, the general public, and I’d bet that even in the cycling communuty have probably not paid too much attention to the case. They may know he was accused of doping, based on positive tests. They are sure to be familiar with the admittedly lame excuses he came up with, on the spur of the moment, shortly following the initial leak last year. And they may be aware of his challenge, and now of the verdict. But how many delved into the details of the case, followed all the legal wrangling before and during the hearing, and attempted to get some understanding of the science involved in the testing? I’d bet not all that many. To most, he got caught, tried to beat the rap and wasn’t successful. There won’t be much pressure on anybody to change things.

I don’t think we’ll see many athletes challenging the ADAs in the future either. Basically, about the only way to win is to be able to show that the test in question was not only improperly conducted, but also be able to show how, specifically, the improper procedure produced a false positive, and that it indeed was false. It won’t work to simple show the test was improperly conducted, since the presumption is that the labs are all fine. And the athlete will have to show both A and B tests were bad. The unstated subtext to the panel’s ruling is “don’t mess with USADA (and WADA) because we will slap you down.

Had Landis simply accepted the testing results in August of 2006, he would be eligible to resume racing next year in August, if he so desired (maybe in the ToM?), as it stands now he’ll have to wait until the begining of 2009. May end up not being of significance to Landis, but maybe to some other rider in the future. If a test comes up positive, you will loose time and money fighting it, even if innocent, might just as well take your medicine and get on with things.

I am rather cynical about all this, it’s my nature. I have seen elsewhere how the “system” works and how hard it is to beat, whether it’s school, work or whatever.

So, what to do now? Well, the case still has at least a little way to run before completely finished, as Landis ponders whether to appeal. I will continue to follow things here and over at TbV. I will continue to ride myself, although to only competition do anymore is simply with myself (barring a possible appearance in the senior Show-Me games) and I will continue to follow cycling in general, and the TdF. I will hope that maybe, sometime, somehow, things will get better. Maybe slowly, bit by bit; or maybe in a revolution. Maybe the riders will wake up and realize they have some power, perhaps the only power, to effect a change in the system. After all, without riders there can be no racing.

Well, enough rambling or reflecting or whatever for the day.

Previous post:

Next post: