I believe Lance, not Floyd...here's why.

[red_flanders]

In my humble opinion, Floyd hasn't viciously, not even deliberately, implicated Boogerd or Pereiro.
These were just digressions. Context. Nothing more, nothing less.
And Kimmage understood that correctly, else Boogerd's and Pereiro's names would have been in the Sunday Times article.

Thanks for posting this. You're 100% spot on, and this is key. The reactions of Boogerd and Pereiro are as if they'd been attacked, and in some abstract way they have been. But certainly in the case of Boogerd it wasn't some kind of attack as if Landis singled him out for revenge. He just told a story that illustrated how things work, and Boogerd was the example. He just doesn't care any more about protecting people.

That he named the riders just adds more credence to the story.

 

[red_flanders]

Let me put it this way, the more I dive into things he says, the less inclined I am to jump on board with the face-value of his statements.

Because of the evidence at hand or your feelings about Landis?

Personally, I can't find much to question about what he's saying. There are no contradictions, no funny pieces which don't fit, no changes in the story anymore. It reeks of truth. That a very detailed version of his testimony has satisfied a cop who can sniff out BS better than any of us just makes it all that much more believable.

 

[scribe]

Thanks for posting this. You're 100% spot on, and this is key. The reactions of Boogerd and Pereiro are as if they'd been attacked, and in some abstract way they have been. But certainly in the case of Boogerd it wasn't some kind of attack as if Landis singled him out for revenge. He just told a story that illustrated how things work, and Boogerd was the example. He just doesn't care any more about protecting people.

That he named the riders just adds more credence to the story.

You can name riders, but a bruise on the arm does not make a doper. It just means they've probably taken a needle. Being named places that person on the immediate defense in the court of public opinion. Why can't we just have a dialogue where people caught in a clear doping control are the cheats?

 

[Barrus]

Let me put it this way, the more I dive into things he says, the less inclined I am to jump on board with the face-value of his statements.

I totally agree with you that we should not take things at face value and I doubt many things in the Landis story, yet I do think there is a core of truth to many things he says. Now, let me just get this straight, is this not also the position of yourself? Perhaps we disagree upon what things we think are not correct or just falt-out lies, but the essence is the same, that you also believe that there is a core of truth to many of the things he is saying?

Just trying to get a common ground upon which we can than built on and continue the discussion

 

[this_is_edie]

In my humble opinion, Floyd hasn't viciously, not even deliberately, implicated Boogerd or Pereiro.
These were just digressions. Context. Nothing more, nothing less.
And Kimmage understood that correctly, else Boogerd's and Pereiro's names would have been in the Sunday Times article.

No more lies, and no more having-to-think-about-what-I-may-or-may-not-say-and-whom-I-may-or-may-not-name-by-the-name. I think that's Landis' new motto.

Some seem to have misunderstood the status of the Kimmage interview: it was completely off the record, even though it was being recorded.

When you talk to a friend, tell stories to eachother, you're also likely to combine truths with half-truths.
So I don't see why we should scan the Kimmage interview in search of half-truths, or other passages that might have been deliberately put in there by Landis.

I agree with most of what you say except for the bolded part. All the interview was on the record, once that recorder went on (actually once they sat down together), it is on the record.

 

[Benotti69]

You can name riders, but a bruise on the arm does not make a doper. It just means they've probably taken a needle. Being named places that person on the immediate defense in the court of public opinion. Why can't we just have a dialogue where people caught in a clear doping control are the cheats?

clear doping controls doesn't exist. i would have thought that was obvious

 

[BotanyBay]

Periero not only took what Floyd coveted, but threw him under the bus while doing as much.

Unfortunately, Omerta works that way. Everyone has to take a turn with the shovel down in the pinelands.

 

[red_flanders]

You can name riders, but a bruise on the arm does not make a doper. It just means they've probably taken a needle. Being named places that person on the immediate defense in the court of public opinion. Why can't we just have a dialogue where people caught in a clear doping control are the cheats?

Very simple. Because those in charge of enforcing the controls have been shown to be corrupt.

Because it's fantasyland. Made for those who prefer to keep the sport and their heroes intact. Not about truth or what's best for cycling.

 

[Benotti69]

I agree with most of what you say except for the bolded part. All the interview was on the record, once that recorder went on (actually once they sat down together), it is on the record.

we dont know if Landis asked that the recorder be turned off or Kimmage turned it off for certain parts of the interview.

 

[flicker]

Thanks for posting this. You're 100% spot on, and this is key. The reactions of Boogerd and Pereiro are as if they'd been attacked, and in some abstract way they have been. But certainly in the case of Boogerd it wasn't some kind of attack as if Landis singled him out for revenge. He just told a story that illustrated how things work, and Boogerd was the example. He just doesn't care any more about protecting people.

That he named the riders just adds more credence to the story.

Landis, Kimmage and Walsh throw their hand grenades quite accurately.

If they were dogs I would say they are Dobberman Pinchers.

I was bitten by one cycling, it nipped my achilles heal. I did go to the hospital

 

[scribe]

Very simple. Because those in charge of enforcing the controls have been shown to be corrupt.

Because it's fantasyland. Made for those who prefer to keep the sport and their heroes intact. Not about truth or what's best for cycling.

Shown to be corrupt because Landis or Race Radio say so? Not saying the aren't, but can we be a little objective in the rationalizations?

 

[Benotti69]

Landis, Kimmage and Walsh throw their hand grenades quite accurately.

If they were dogs I would say they are Dobberman Pinchers.

I was bitten by one cycling, it nipped my achilles heal. I did go to the hospital

when up against the goliath of the Omerta and not many greandes at your disposal you need to be accurate and these last few have been bullseyes

 

[this_is_edie]

we dont know if Landis asked that the recorder be turned off or Kimmage turned it off for certain parts of the interview.

I'll agree to that, but saying the Kimmage published anything that was off the record is wrong - which is what I understood sniper to mean.

 

[scribe]

Unfortunately, Omerta works that way. Everyone has to take a turn with the shovel down in the pinelands.

No it doesn't. It actually works the opposite. Along the lines of "I believe he didn't dope", "I don't feel like the true winner", "Looking forward to his return to competition". Any of those sound familiar, and certainly not FL's experience?

 

[MD FACG FACP]

Thanks. It is funny how those who agree with me seem to speak and think logically, while those who disagree sound like children, some just want to believe Lance is guilty or everyone is guilty.

If everyone is guilty, then Landis deserves his 'win' back.

Also, just because there is an "investigation", how could that possibly "prove" there is guilt? Dumb conclusion (from page 1 )

As to the administrator, this is new. The Landis interview is new. Even M. Bogerd agrees with me that these are lies, quoted today. If you are an administrator, we don't need your opinion. Delete a few of the trolls here, but let us have our own discussions without some 'supervisor' thinking he knows better than all of us. You should be fired for threatening a poster who sees Landis is untrustworthy.

Your opinion is based on well your opinion. No facts. Pretty sad when the only guy who agrees with you is Polish.

 

[scribe]

I totally agree with you that we should not take things at face value and I doubt many things in the Landis story, yet I do think there is a core of truth to many things he says. Now, let me just get this straight, is this not also the position of yourself? Perhaps we disagree upon what things we think are not correct or just falt-out lies, but the essence is the same, that you also believe that there is a core of truth to many of the things he is saying?

Just trying to get a common ground upon which we can than built on and continue the discussion

I am in agreement with everything you are saying. The essence of Landis' claims strike me as real.

 

[Hugh Januss]

I'm sorry, I did not realize that the investigation was being conducted on your timeline. Which deadline did they blow?

More importantly how does he know what evidence the investigation has uncovered? The investigation has released exactly zero of what they have found at this point. Everything that we have heard is probably less than 10% of what the GJ has heard. They release nothing while they are investigating. Stuff only leaks. Further the fact that the investigation is continuing this long can only mean that they are finding fire underneath Landis' smoke. As has been pointed out already if other witnesses had not corroborated Landis' story the investigation would have died a quiet death, and we would be left with "I know Lance did it but it looks like he's gonna get away with it again".

 

[BotanyBay]

You can name riders, but a bruise on the arm does not make a doper. It just means they've probably taken a needle. Being named places that person on the immediate defense in the court of public opinion. Why can't we just have a dialogue where people caught in a clear doping control are the cheats?

There was a time when I believed that bike racers at the TDF needed to pump IV fluids after a stage to combat dehydration. Like everyone else, I thought that IV bags were as much a part of bike racing as properly-aged Vittoria tires. Their regular presence just made it "normal' for me. I assumed it belonged. And so did most everyone else.

Then I later came to learn (through formal education) that you only put IV fluids into a person that can't hold-down liquids due to heat exhaustion/stroke. In other words, hospitalization (or at least the ER). The healthy stomach process fluids exceptionally well. Any doctor that does otherwise is involved in the malpractice of medicine.

Now, years later, I know better. So if I see a rider with lots of needle marks or bruises in strategic locations, I have a pretty darn good reason to suspect.

 

[red_flanders]

Shown to be corrupt because Landis or Race Radio say so? Not saying the aren't, but can we be a little objective in the rationalizations?

Shown to be corrupt because of a long history of proving it, most notably with Festina, but certainly extending long before that. Landis' testimony just confirms what has been patently obvious for decades. It's not even remotely surprising.

Please don't ascribe reasons to my statements then dispute them as if I'd said them. It doesn't work, and it puts your posts in a bad light. IMO.

It's notable to me that you've chosen to ignore what I have said, not addressed my points, and have "responded" to things I didn't say.

 

[Hugh Januss]

Your opinion is based on well your opinion. No facts. Pretty sad when the only guy who agrees with you in Polish.

Don't forget Flicker, he may not get his check if he doesn't get due credit for his efforts.

 

[BotanyBay]

As has been pointed out already if other witnesses had not corroborated Landis' story the investigation would have died a quiet death, and we would be left with "I know Lance did it but it looks like he's gonna get away with it again".

Because of Landis' lack of courtroom credibility, anything he offers or gives to the investigation will be independently confirmed. They'll make the case without him. So he has no reason to lie about it now. He knows darn well that the feds will run (and bust) any lie he tells. The feds hate being lied to. I have no doubt they communicated this fact to him in abundance.

 

[BotanyBay]

Thanks. It is funny how those who agree with me seem to speak and think logically, while those who disagree sound like children, some just want to believe Lance is guilty or everyone is guilty.

You know, there's this great new resort community. I saw Erik Estrada pitching it on late-night TV. You, Flicker and Polish can all move there to be around like-minded people.

 

[scribe]

There was a time when I believed that bike racers at the TDF needed to pump IV fluids after a stage to combat dehydration. Like everyone else, I thought that IV bags were as much a part of bike racing as properly-aged Vittoria tires. Their regular presence just made it "normal' for me. I assumed it belonged. And so did most everyone else.

Then I later came to learn (through formal education) that you only put IV fluids into a person that can't hold-down liquids due to heat exhaustion/stroke. In other words, hospitalization (or at least the ER). The healthy stomach process fluids exceptionally well. Any doctor that does otherwise is involved in the malpractice of medicine.

Now, years later, I know better. So if I see a rider with lots of needle marks or bruises in strategic locations, I have a pretty darn good reason to suspect.

There are other reasons for needles.

 

[Hugh Januss]

There are other reasons for needles.

And the only reasons that are legal under WADA rules are for drug tests and medical emergencies (to which not winning does not apply).

 

[BotanyBay]

There are other reasons for needles.

And 99% of those "other reasons" use the kind of needles that don't cause bruising.