Armstrong statement imminent! Email exchanges to be revealed

[Dr. Maserati]

Jeebus. How many races did Cipo or Zabel or McEwen win during those years? Some of those sprinters were winning twenty races a year. They would have been tested for each win. In addition there would have been a few random tests.

For consistency I went to one website,


Armstrong had 91 victories.

Zabel had 213 victories.

Cippo had 189 victories.

McEwen had 196 victories

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

Those numbers do not include leader jersey testing, or random (which we can all agree is equal).

Random testing slowly increased by quite a bit starting around the time of the UCI/ASO split, and more so when Puerto broke. This is why Kohl said he was tested about 200 times in his relatively short, though active, career. He, like Cavendish, Thor, etc. likely faced more tests than Armstrong did before he retired, just as I'm sure those racers have faced more since his return.

Thus, it stands to reason that McEwen, Zabel, Bettini, and Freire have possibly been tested more than anyone in cycling history, simply because they have raced long, active careers up to the present, with Paolo and Erik retiring just over a year ago now.

 

[Ferminal]

heres a good one

by Allycs on May 21, 2010 at 2:57 PM

Armstrong is THE most tested athlete in the history of professional sports.He was tested at the end of EVERY stage in each Tour de France that that he has ridden in since his comeback from cancer.Blood and urine......CLEAN

Maybe he could post those results up on his website, to show how clean he is?

...

 

[Anonymous]

Those are probably fans, not interns.

it was an intern. they signed the email.

 

[Aerodynamics]

Where?

Check the dates when the emails were written, as well as when they were forwarded, and check who wrote what!

Floyd is not threatening to tell USADA if he is not let in the race. He is promising to tell USADA and pushing others to play a part in exposing the truth.

"I'm in the process of arranging, within the next two weeks, another meeting with USADA in which I name the racers and staff who helped me to use performance enhancing drugs and avoid detection and am led to believe, by the stance that the Tour of California has taken, that you would be interested in joining us in that meeting so as to ascertain information about which teams to invite in the future." April 24

Instead, what I see is Kay trying to broker a settlement between Armstong, Messick and Landis.

"Anyway my idea is for you to ride with lance on his team, have them work to re-build your image and be fairly compensated as a Tour de France Champion. *Everyone, particularly the fans, would love to see this. *I’m pretty sure that both you and Lance will not want to do this and that is why I am asking you to do it for me and my family. *I think you have done enough good things now and have just about regained all of your champion form that they should be able to figure out the media part of it. *They are the biggest and best in the world at that stuff so while it might be very challenging it should not be that difficult with your current story...." April 28

The only suggestion of a quid pro quo I could find was in relation to a tent site at ToC. Landis suggests that either the team should be in the race or the money for the tent site returned.

"Therefore I think it reasonable, in the event that you cannot add his team to the TOC, that you refund the 40K that Dr Kay has paid for the tent since, for one he has been snubbed from the race and moreover the 40K along with all of the other money that you leverage from small American teams ends up deposited directly into Lance Armstrongs account as an appearance fee." April 22

And other people get accused of spinning for Lance Armstrong.

At the very least there is an implied threat. We have Landis wanting to be allowed to race and be paid the same as Wiggings and Cavendish, and saying it will be embarrassing for the tour if he is not, despite him being the most famous doper in American cycling. If they had allowed in the team from the beginning it's unlikely he would have done this. People can read it for themselves and read through the lines - both sides will be aware that you don't use direct threatening language to make your point.

 

[Aerodynamics]

it was an intern. they signed the email.

A fan reported it to Livestrong. Wow.

 

[Francois the Postman]

Amazing. Absolutely amazing.

I expected that Landis would have said something stupid or ill-tempered, and out of context would make him sound paranoid or off-balance. Given where he is at (either with the truth on his side or as a liar), the chances are he would have flipped somewhere and tooted too loudly, and it then would be easy to pick and mix extracts to reinforce that image.

What we have here is the case that Lance&Co claimed to be damning (it reportedly would show incoherency, warped time lines, repeated and clear extortion efforts, and an unstable mind in full swing).

what we actually get

1) a conversation between some key parties with evidently bits of the conversation missing. Key bits too by the sound of it, as Landis is reacting to bits that upset him (yet staying polite and calm to the guy he considers to be an equally big fraud who should not get the large slice of money that others add to the pot), without us being told what exactly it was was that "camp Lance" said (why? We appear to get most of the conversation of the others in this play. Surely you want to reveal your own role too!).

2) a stance by rider that is internally totally consistent, fairly calm and respectful under the circumstances. Argued and measured if you assume that he is mostly driven by a desire to earn a living, change the playing field for the better for all, and wants some recognition that compared to the lot he wasn't that black, relatively (if we take his POV as valid)

3) a rider arguing he and his team should be included on relative merit and bafflement why his team is considere to be to weak. Frankly, based on the names in that list, on merit: so am I.

4) no extortion-type conversation. I really fail to see the type of blackmail that is alleged. He is not starting by saying: if you don't let me in, I will be making up ****. Whicjh he would need to start with if he wanted to make up ****. You gotta make that clear, not? Instead it is pointed out, after making a case for strength alone, as part of other but related points, that I will be coming clean officially, on the record, to the appropriate authorities. In private, behind the scenes. If you were blackmailing, you would not be saying anonymously, surely. You make spilling the beans publicly, and conditional. He said he was spilling the beans anyway, anonymously except for his own role, for the benefit of the riders and sport in the long run.

3) a heartfelt plea by a party on Landis' side of the coin to come to an arrangement for the benefit of all, and of the sport. He comes out of this smelling like roses.

4) amazingly, not one comment by Lance along the lines of "what the **** are you on about?". Event organiser stands back from it. Nothing in what we get from Lance that shows a "WTF" angle. We don't get Lance's replies in much detail at all, actually. This just strikes me as odd. Surely the inclusion of that part of the conversation would be of ineterest and important to place the rest of the conversation in context? Any journalist asked for the full transcripts? Landis, since "in private and confidential" has been breached by Lance, could you fill in the blanks here?

I'm left with the feeling that something is still missing in this conversation. This certainly isn't damning for Landis at all. But I can see how people who come into it without a critical eye fail to spot the wide gap between the claims by Lance of what it proves, and what it actually proves.

If this guy is making it up and using lies as an extortion tool, these emails are proof Landis has a bizarre, clumsy, almost respectful way to go about it. I'm failing to see a big gun being pointed at people's heads here. "I'm talking to authorities without giving names"? That is it? "I'm talking to authorities and you will be named too", that I would get.

On the other hand, if Landis wasn't making it up, from that starting point, these emails make total sense, including the responses by the parties. (Including a Dr Kay who will probably feel even worse about being involved after Landis came clean about being dirty. He sounds like the one real victim here).

If this was Radioshack's best case to show an insane guy in turmoil, I am glad the feds are in play. They will take more convincing than a lazy press, they will have some tough questions for all, and some great screws and teeth in their arsenal.

These emails, to me, make Landis' version of events sound like it actually fits that what is in the public domain at the moment much better than it did before they were published.

On the basis of the published emails, it is Lance who is making things up that are not there to see, in plain view. If I was the Feds, I would have added a few questions to Mr Armstrong after this, and certainly felt the case for investigation to get clariity just was made a lot stronger, not weaker.

"Why am I not seeing what you pretend is here", for starters. "What is missing, where is the rest? Can we see your records please?"

 

[Aerodynamics]

On the basis of the published emails, it is Lance who is making things up that are not there to see, in plain view.

Not at all. Remember you're a small group of hatchet men on the internet who see everything in the context of getting Armstrong. For the mainstream media and neutral observers it is damning that Floyd is trying to negotiate entry into the ToC - something rather stupid in any event - at the same time as he is explaining he is having "further meetings" to tell all about how the star riders in the tour are dopers.

You see polite language, others see a clear implied threat and intimidation.

 

[thehog]

Not at all. Remember you're a small group of hatchet men on the internet who see everything in the context of getting Armstrong. For the mainstream media and neutral observers it is damning that Floyd is trying to negotiate entry into the ToC - something rather stupid in any event - at the same time as he is explaining he is having "further meetings" to tell all about how the star riders in the tour are dopers.

You see polite language, others see a clear implied threat and intimidation.

"I believe in Floyd, I believe he hasn't had a fair shake. I don't trust the lab," Armstrong told Associated Press.

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

Not at all. Remember you're a small group of hatchet men on the internet who see everything in the context of getting Armstrong.

What were you saying about ad hominen attacks?

 

[Ferminal]

I think a lot of people are missing the point...

How good would it have been if Floyd ended up at the Vuelta in top shape?

 

[Publicus]

And other people get accused of spinning for Lance Armstrong.

At the very least there is an implied threat. We have Landis wanting to be allowed to race and be paid the same as Wiggings and Cavendish, and saying it will be embarrassing for the tour if he is not, despite him being the most famous doper in American cycling. If they had allowed in the team from the beginning it's unlikely he would have done this. People can read it for themselves and read through the lines - both sides will be aware that you don't use direct threatening language to make your point.

Merricks says there was no implied threat/extortion:

Andrew Messick, president of AEG Sports that owns the Tour, said that the ToC welcomed Landis last year when his suspension from cycling ended but that his new team didn't warrant an invite this year. "Floyd thought it was personal. He thought he was being punished. And he did what he did. Whether there is a link there, that's a question to ask Floyd."

Asked whether Landis threatened to go public with his allegations if his team was not invited, Messick said, "He didn't, but we all listen to the chatter. It's other people who call you and tell you stuff. But Floyd never said it."

Seems to me that making an allegation that Landis was trying to blackmail/extort anyone has to be based on an actual threat to blackmail/extort, not what someone thought. The emails certainly don't give the impression that he was indirectly implying that his silence could be bought.

 

[131313]

wow, this is the smoking gun? wow....just....wow....

I guess the hope isn't in the content of these e-mails, but that they can be simply boiled down to "Landis extortion e-mails revealed" in the hopes that no one actually reads them...

I'm glad they were released though because I learned something new and have a little more faith in the world: Brent Kay is actually a good guy. All along I assumed he was doping up Flandis, and getting high on his own supply as a master's racer. Turns out I was dead wrong. A little gullible, but he's a straight-shooter and a true believer. Go figure.

Also, it puts out there the dirty secret about how small teams actually get into races (buying their way in), and the business of appearance fees. I know people in cycling know about this but the masses don't, and generally the organizers don't like to draw attention to it.

 

[Aerodynamics]

"I believe in Floyd, I believe he hasn't had a fair shake. I don't trust the lab," Armstrong told Associated Press.

Yes, Mr Spin. Taking a statement from Armstrong in the past for Floyds freedom campaign. Very clever.

 

[Aerodynamics]

What were you saying about ad hominen attacks?

It was not actually an ad hominen attack. It's a serious point. Remember you guys are a small cult of people that want the Armstrong witch burnt at all costs. You don't represent cycling fans in general, let alone the wider public. That's why you are happy to bite your nose off to spite the face.

 

[kiwirider]

Those numbers do not include leader jersey testing, or random (which we can all agree is equal).

Random testing slowly increased by quite a bit starting around the time of the UCI/ASO split, and more so when Puerto broke. This is why Kohl said he was tested about 200 times in his relatively short, though active, career. He, like Cavendish, Thor, etc. likely faced more tests than Armstrong did before he retired, just as I'm sure those racers have faced more since his return.

Thus, it stands to reason that McEwen, Zabel, Bettini, and Freire have possibly been tested more than anyone in cycling history, simply because they have raced long, active careers up to the present, with Paolo and Erik retiring just over a year ago now.

Can someone send a link to this thread to Pat McQuaid?? That way, next time he's interviewed he'll not come across as a complete **** for spouting out the "Armstrong's the most tested athlete in the world line" ... (as he did in the recent time on Irish radio that has been posted in these threads)

I mean, honestly, Pat ... if you're going to try to help Armstrong's camp bury Landis, make sure that you don't use lines like that which are so blatantly wrong and widely discredited that even Armstrong's given up on using them now!! It really doesn't help his case ....

 

[Moose McKnuckles]

This Aerodynamics muppet is going to the ignore list.
I do take some comfort in seeing the Armstrong lackeys get all worked up over this. Landis hit a nerve and he used a hammer to do it. Well played, Floyd.

 

[thehog]

Yes, Mr Spin. Taking a statement from Armstrong in the past for Floyds freedom campaign. Very clever.

Which proves the original point. It was well before any campaign. It was when Floyd had no idea what to say. Armstrong was first to speak.

 

[Aerodynamics]

Merricks says there was no implied threat/extortion:

Seems to me that making an allegation that Landis was trying to blackmail/extort anyone has to be based on an actual threat to blackmail/extort, not what someone thought. The emails certainly don't give the impression that he was indirectly implying that his silence could be bought.

To me it was a very passive agressive email done in official language. The implied threat is very much there. Step back and think about who is saying this and how and when this information has subsequently come out.

I don't think anyone would disagree that Floyd is a very good liar - he had a lot of people fooled over the past four years. He took a lot of money. He went on the media a lot. You're trying to make out he is Jesus here or something because he doesn't swear in an email.

 

[Aerodynamics]

Which proves the original point. It was well before any campaign. It was when Floyd had no idea what to say. Armstrong was first to speak.

No it doesn't, of course. It's just a bit forum silliness that doesn't mean anything in the real world, like most of your stuff.

Do you really want a clean sport? What is your motivation here? Don't you understand the history the sport and how things were? I really don't understand you. You come across to me like a simplistic kid.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

To me it was a very passive agressive email done in official language. The implied threat is very much there. Step back and think about who is saying this and how and when this information has subsequently come out.

I don't think anyone would disagree that Floyd is a very good liar - he had a lot of people fooled over the past four years. He took a lot of money. He went on the media a lot. You're trying to make out he is Jesus here or something because he doesn't swear in an email.

I just copied your piece and changed three words - in red.

I think it reads quite well.

I don't think anyone would disagree that Lance is a very good liar - he had a lot of people fooled over the past eighteen years. He took a lot of money. He went on the media a lot. You're trying to make out he is God here or something because he doesn't swear in an email

 

[Moose McKnuckles]

Floyd is a liar and a cheat. If he were still making money off cheating, this whole affair would have never happened.

However, he's not. And he's trying to expose the unfairness of some people making money from cheating while others sleep on friends' couches.

Floyd's character isn't an issue here, though. The fact that he's now exposed Armstrong and others is the issue, and the only response so far has been to attack Floyd and to use the well-worn "never tested positive" excuse.

Let's face it. If Floyd were lying, he'd be facing a lawsuit by now. But he's not, and we all know why.

 

[Francois the Postman]

To me it was a very passive aggressive email done in official language. The implied threat is very much there. Step back and think about who is saying this and how and when this information has subsequently come out.

I did. Merricks himself says there was none. I take his word over yours. How do you explain that Merricks said Landis never did, which would include these emails?

Remember, Merricks has nothing to lose, he wasn't doping (or not). So he will want to make sure that what he is stating now for the record will be accurate.

Either Landis isn't lying, or he is.

If he is, there is still no real passive aggressive threat in this "reveal" email, and certainly not the extortion campaign one that Lance claimed. There is a disconnect between what Landis is accused to have done behind the scenes (by Lance), and what we are presented with. Emails that don't show it, and the one perosn who should know all about it denies Landis did. He said he got mutterings from 3rd parties, but never said who these are. For all I know these could be parties sympathetic to Landis, neutral, or hostile.

On the other hand, if Landis isn't lying, the only ones who have something to lose are those named, and Lance and Bruyneel more than others. If Landis himself was as OTT as claimed by them, they really should have better material than this. They would not have missed the best chance of shooting Landis out of the water. If this is their best shot, it's a miss by some distance.

Standing back, there is a lot we don't know. But we do know the narrative that Lance claims is supported by evidence he has and has now shared. It doesn't, it actually raises more questions on Lance's side than it answers.

I did step back and thought who is saying what and what information has subsequently come out, and who by. It doesn't add up. At all. Lance's portrayal does not match the facts he chose/cherry-picked to share. I find that highly peculiar.

All the more that, if we assume Landis wasn't lying, these emails are not a weak case that support Landis (like they are weak at best for Lance), they actually are making a lot of sense, and sense in one direction only. In that case, it isn't Landis who is making **** up about what these emails prove.

So, recap: if Lance is telling the truth, these emails are very weak at best and Merricks is lying (surely not to protect Landis who was blackmailing him in a crazy way?). If Landis' account is correct however, it would mean that Lance can't make a strong case to prove the opposite.

On strength, the last one is actually in line with what happened here. At best these emails make a very weak case to support the claims Lance make and a strong case to support Landis account of recent events. To believe Lance, you also need to read things in there that are contradicted by the person who is supposed to be the one blackmailed.

Standing back, as you suggested,.....hmmmmm.......

 

[Publicus]

To me it was a very passive agressive email done in official language. The implied threat is very much there. Step back and think about who is saying this and how and when this information has subsequently come out.

I don't think anyone would disagree that Floyd is a very good liar - he had a lot of people fooled over the past four years. He took a lot of money. He went on the media a lot. You're trying to make out he is Jesus here or something because he doesn't swear in an email.

If the person who was supposedly the target of the extortion says explicitly that he was not extorted or blackmailed that's not enough for you???

 

[BYOP88]

Floyd is a liar and a cheat. If he were still making money off cheating, this whole affair would have never happened.

However, he's not. And he's trying to expose the unfairness of some people making money from cheating while others sleep on friends' couches.

Floyd's character isn't an issue here, though. The fact that he's now exposed Armstrong and others is the issue, and the only response so far has been to attack Floyd and to use the well-worn "never tested positive" excuse.

Let's face it. If Floyd were lying, he'd be facing a lawsuit by now. But he's not, and we all know why.

Completely agree with what that, if I was Hincapie/DZ etc, the 1st thing I would've done was called my lawyer and started the ball rolling on suing FLandis, instead those involved who've replied on the issue have said the same old crap "I've never tested positive etc etc etc".