Landis letter re drug use in cycling

[Jonathan]

I think what happens next is going to have the most impact. If someone comes forward and corroberates Landis's claims, then the issue will gain traction. If no one does, the issue not only dies but Floyd is done - totally.

This was a huge gamble, and if no evidence pops out to back these claims he will thoroughly have discredited himself. Thus far, the condemnation of these accussations has been universal, except from long term Lance Bashers like Kimmel.

In a system that is, and must be, run based on evidence, that is not a good sign for Floyd.

For those who think Lance cannot ride the Tour now .... based on what might be said about him (its been said a long time and has had zero effect on Lance) or because of Tour rules (who have zero love or affection for Landis) they may be sorely disappointed.

But what decisions, that "we" supposedly make, were you talking about in your previous post?

 

[BroDeal]

It won't surprise me to see some sketchy emails from FLandis from the end of last season when he was probably trying to get a spot on RS.

I also would not rely upon FLandis having a master plan to lay a trap for Armstrong and then hit him hard when he walks into it. Although the tweet from months ago about planning something big fo 2010 indicates forethought and planning, one thing that is consistent about Landis' defense is that he received bad advice from those around him. To make matters worse, the advice was often immature as well as bad.

I think that this thing was done rather haphazardly. The writing quality of the email backs up that thought.

 

[gree0232]

I don't really understand your point - do you think that this forum is the place where decisions are made? Exactly what decisions are you talking about here?

If someone "may be doped to the hip," is it wrong to try to argue about this likelihood, and to have an opinion about that?

Wrong to point out the possibilities? No.

Wrong to conclude that possibilities equate to doping? Yes.

The discussion, particularly about Armstrong is well beyond the theoretical with highly emotive exchanges that basically shut down the back and forth. And when these possibilities go to a neutral authority for decision .....

There are plenty of posts on this thread where people have essentially convicted Lance of doping in their minds. And with that foregone conclusion have basically blasted the system for failing to convict him (for which there is not enough evidence to secure a conviction) and insulting anyone who tries to explain why there has been no conviction.

The focus on Lance with the huge implications of Landis's accussations are the result.

This has, for many, become an, "See, I told you so!" issue rather than a discussion about what Floyd has really said - and for which he has no evidence.

The upshot, everyone can have an opinion, but at the end of the day a guys IS or IS NOT a doper based on whether he has been convicted.

At some point we can make a case that any rider who has ever achieved a result is doped - and at that point our 'opinions' have effectively undermined our own sport. What is the point?

 

[wattage]

What I am concerned is that Vaughters hasn't stepped up. This guy talks about how clean their team is and how he is all about cleaner cycling. Now is the time to start acting. If he doesn't open his mouth up he's just as bad as JB.

 

[gree0232]

But what decisions, that "we" supposedly make, were you talking about in your previous post?

Are we going to support the sport based on evidence or are we going to tear it down because we desperately want to get Lance? Consquences be dambed.

That is our decision.

Do we accept that the system works, or not?

If the discussion of actual evidence leads to an obvious error in the UCI/WADA/whoever's analysis - it will come out in the press or somewhere else and lead to something. It always does.

 

[gree0232]

What I am concerned is that Vaughters hasn't stepped up. This guy talks about how clean their team is and how he is all about cleaner cycling. Now is the time to start acting. If he doesn't open his mouth up he's just as bad as JB.

He's actually come out and says he fully supports Dave Z.

 

[wattage]

He's actually come out and says he fully supports Dave Z.

Yep..that's sad. He's like JB in my book now.

 

[polpolpol]

This has, for many, become an, "See, I told you so!" issue rather than a discussion about what Floyd has really said - and for which he has no evidence.

As a witness, Landis' testimony is evidence. There is no need for some kind of third party as long as his description fits with facts.

 

[thehog]

What I am concerned is that Vaughters hasn't stepped up. This guy talks about how clean their team is and how he is all about cleaner cycling. Now is the time to start acting. If he doesn't open his mouth up he's just as bad as JB.

We should respect that JV is actually try to win a bike race at the moment. Give them time to develop some thought behind their approach. I think we'll see much more next week.

 

[gree0232]

Yep..that's sad. He's like JB in my book now.

And another case in point.

Vaughters has one of the strongest stanecs against doping imagineable, but because he will not throw Dave Z. to the wolves he is tainted?

Dave Z may not be a doper at all - but who cares? Vaughters sure as s*** does.

Again, this is why evidence rather than finger pointing and speculation MUST be the standard.

 

[Anonymous]

I think what happens next is going to have the most impact. If someone comes forward and corroberates Landis's claims, then the issue will gain traction. If no one does, the issue not only dies but Floyd is done - totally.

This was a huge gamble, and if no evidence pops out to back these claims he will thoroughly have discredited himself. Thus far, the condemnation of these accussations has been universal, except from long term Lance Bashers like Kimmel.

In a system that is, and must be, run based on evidence, that is not a good sign for Floyd.

For those who think Lance cannot ride the Tour now .... based on what might be said about him (its been said a long time and has had zero effect on Lance) or because of Tour rules (who have zero love or affection for Landis) they may be sorely disappointed.

There is a Federal investigation underway. I would suggest that your rush to judgment regarding the facts is a bit hurried and done so because of the determination YOU have already made in YOUR mind. Then you come in here and tell us all we cannot do that.

Your hero is a fraud. Just accept it and move on.

 

[gree0232]

There is a Federal investigation underway. I would suggest that your rush to judgment regarding the facts is a bit hurried and done so because of the determination YOU have already made in YOUR mind. Then you come in here and tell us all we cannot do that.

Your hero is a fraud. Just accept it and move on.

And I suggest you remember that the investigation may wind up going both ways. It may very well turn out that Landis winds up on the spot for attempted blackmail. By his own admission he has no proof of what he is saying, and it is sort of hard to get a conviction without evidence.

And for the record, as the basher again go emotional, I don't care one wit whether Lance doped or not. I will call him a doper when he is convicted.

You can think he is a doper all you want. He IS a doper when you actually prove it. Good Luck. An accussation from Landis equates to - just one more accussation.

Maybe something will be come loose as a result of this broadside, but until it does .... Lance ain't a doper - or any of the other riders he has accussed.

So, accept the way the system actually works rather than demanding that I adopt your position sans proof.

And as we will no doubt go through the many accussations, I would like the Lance bashers to include the rebuttals. These have all been looked into be people gunning to take down Lance, and nothing has stuck. Another accussation with even less evidence in support will not change that equation.

 

[Kamikaze]

As a witness, Landis' testimony is evidence. There is no need for some kind of third party as long as his description fits with facts.

The word is FACTS. Who is going to decide if those are facts? from a guy that wrote a book and spent millions telling otherwise?

 

[Barrus]

I have for some time thought about this and although it is off course important to catch Armstrong and Bruyneel, especially to show that nobody is untouchable, this is not the main concern.

The main concern is the cycle and the culture of doping that is rampant within the peloton. This is what needs to be the focus, that not only the riders but even more so the managers, trainers, doctors and the DS's of teams are complicit, even more than that they are the main source of the problem. This culture needs to be handled with and should have been the focus of the anti-doping movement for some time. However this is not the case.

The most damaging and drastic allegation that Landis makes is the corruption within the system, something I am happy that the WADA at least appears to take into account. Too long the UCI has appeared corrupt and unethical, how can an agency with such a reputation ever be in charge of the enforcement and supervisory part of any branch of sports. This entire system needs to be completely overturned

Or as Adam Myerson said:

So burn down Babylon. Burn pro cycling down. There will still be racing, there will still be races. Burn it down, so we can build it up again new. I condemn Landis' original decision to participate in a corrupt, immoral system. But I'll stand in front of the flames with him and watch it burn.

 

[BroDeal]

There are a few ways this thing gets legs.

1) A former Postal rider comes forward and corroborates it. I think some sort of amnesty may be required to get an active rider to come forward. The doping rules are deliberately written to avoid giving people a free pass to reveal the extent of doping, so I am not sure that an amnesty is possible. The best best is retired rider from the 1998 - 2000 Postal team. There were lots of "small fry" U.S. riders who could not cut it in Europe. They also witnessed the transformation of the team when Armstrong and Bruyneel got rid of Dr. Steffan and brought in the doctors for ONCE.

2) U.S. police investigation. I am not convinced that FLandis' contact with the FDA is anymore than sending emails or a phone call.

3) The infusion kit investigation bears fruit. If several members of last year's Astana Tour squad are shown to have been using illegal methods then that will prove that Bruyneel runs a dirty team. The riders would also be arrested by French police and possibly crack under questioning. I won't be surpised to see none of the former Astana riders, including Armstrong, who made it to Paris last year ride on this year's RS Tour squad.

4. After a rider like Zabriskie retires then tells the truth. So years later Flandis is proved right by others talking when they do not have to worry about serving a doping ban.

 

[lancaster]

Despite everyone "denying" all accusations, has anyone made comments to the effect that
"I have never doped
I have never witnessed a team mate dope,
I have never sought or been offered advice on how to dope from team mates or team staff,
I have never offered advice on how to dope nor medication to team mates
if any team mate or team trainer or DS had offered advice or medication or i had witnessed the administration of a doping programme i would have reported it to the relevant administrative organisation and doping organisation."

if that statement was true for any of those involved i would have expected them to be saying it, trashing Landis is not any sort of denial.

 

[euanli]

I don't think this story will move on until the Giro and AToC are both finished. The we might hear from the people we most want to speak out, such as DZ and Vaughters.

 

[The_Z_man]

Do we accept that the system works, or not?

Just because Lance has never been caught does not mean the system works. Look at all the guys who got away with it, and never got caught. Bjarne Riis came out and said he doped during the Tour he won. By your logic, no matter what Riis says, since he never tested positive, he wasn't a doper.

I think the system does not work. Hopefully the biggest offshoot of the Landis email will be that the current system gets torn down, and a new, truly clean one goes up in it's place.

 

[Anonymous]

Wrong to point out the possibilities? No.

Wrong to conclude that possibilities equate to doping? Yes.

Why, I am not allowed to make my on decisions because you say so?

The discussion, particularly about Armstrong is well beyond the theoretical with highly emotive exchanges that basically shut down the back and forth. And when these possibilities go to a neutral authority for decision .....

I think you must have missed the fact that this is a FORUM and not a court room.

There are plenty of posts on this thread where people have essentially convicted Lance of doping in their minds. And with that foregone conclusion have basically blasted the system for failing to convict him (for which there is not enough evidence to secure a conviction) and insulting anyone who tries to explain why there has been no conviction.

Show me the exact post where someone blasted the system for failing to convict him. EXACT WORDING would be appreciated. Suggesting that the UCI is complicit and untrustworthy is not the same thing. Again, it is personal opinion and not case law.

The focus on Lance with the huge implications of Landis's accussations are the result.

He is the most recognized cyclist in the world, and I don't hear YOU mentioning any of the other riders Landis named.

This has, for many, become an, "See, I told you so!" issue rather than a discussion about what Floyd has really said - and for which he has no evidence.

And you know this how? Oh wait, you were speculating based on your underlying beliefs about the case. You haven't ACTUALLY seen anything regarding any of this other than the email we have also seen. Hypocrisy noted.

The upshot, everyone can have an opinion, but at the end of the day a guys IS or IS NOT a doper based on whether he has been convicted.

At some point we can make a case that any rider who has ever achieved a result is doped - and at that point our 'opinions' have effectively undermined our own sport. What is the point?

Um, it is a FORUM where people DISCUSS THINGS regarding their OPINIONS. Maybe you are new to this interwebs thing or something and have missed the point of having a FORUM.

 

[Jonathan]

Wrong to point out the possibilities? No.

Wrong to conclude that possibilities equate to doping? Yes.

That is not true - if the likelihood is high enough, he probably did it. People build their case by arguing for it. I can argue that Oswald killed Kennedy, that CO2 is causing global warming and that Armstrong doped. You may not like it, but there is nothing inherently wrong with stating an opinion about these things.

The discussion, particularly about Armstrong is well beyond the theoretical with highly emotive exchanges that basically shut down the back and forth. And when these possibilities go to a neutral authority for decision .....

There are plenty of posts on this thread where people have essentially convicted Lance of doping in their minds.

That is absolutely true. don't make the mistake of confusing this with a formal conviction though. A conviction in one's mind just isn't the same.

And with that foregone conclusion have basically blasted the system for failing to convict him (for which there is not enough evidence to secure a conviction) and insulting anyone who tries to explain why there has been no conviction.

The focus on Lance with the huge implications of Landis's accussations are the result.

This has, for many, become an, "See, I told you so!" issue rather than a discussion about what Floyd has really said - and for which he has no evidence.

The upshot, everyone can have an opinion, but at the end of the day a guys IS or IS NOT a doper based on whether he has been convicted.

At some point we can make a case that any rider who has ever achieved a result is doped - and at that point our 'opinions' have effectively undermined our own sport. What is the point?

There is nothing here that prevents anyone from arguing that Armstrong is a doper. I'm convinced he is a doper. Face it - he used EPO and yes, he should be suspended for that. It's not up to me to do that, but I hope it will happen.

You basically make two points: that some members use strong language and that what we regard as true or not true must be based on whether he has been convicted. The first point doesn't have anything to do with what Armstrong shot in his arm, and is irrelevant. The second point makes no sense - our personal opinions can exist regardless of formal convictions.

If you want to convince others that Armstrong should not be called a doper, you will have to do it the hard way - by arguing based on the facts, and not try to refuse other people's right to speak their mind and be convinced by what they see.

 

[polpolpol]

The word is FACTS. Who is going to decide if those are facts? from a guy that wrote a book and spent millions telling otherwise?

The facts in this instances are locations, names, performances, etc which can be empirically verified. If Landis' account of how they came to pass is more convincing than those who disagree that is sufficient.

Example: if I am the sole witness of a bank robbery, the fact that the crew of robbers testifies that I am lying about their actions does not invalidate my testimony. Instead it is the role of the judging party to see which version is more convincing relating to what can be empirically checked.

 

[gree0232]

Just because Lance has never been caught does not mean the system works. Look at all the guys who got away with it, and never got caught. Bjarne Riis came out and said he doped during the Tour he won. By your logic, no matter what Riis says, since he never tested positive, he wasn't a doper.

I think the system does not work. Hopefully the biggest offshoot of the Landis email will be that the current system gets torn down, and a new, truly clean one goes up in it's place.

Yes it does. If you bring the entire system to bear and cannot produce anough evidence for a conviction -- you lose. If you get enough to secure a conviction -- you win. THAT is how the system works.

The predisposition that the system ONLY works with convictions is fallacy. It means anyone accussed is automatically guilty - and that is sure a hell not a system.

 

[Oldman]

I think what happens next is going to have the most impact.

For those who think Lance cannot ride the Tour now .... based on what might be said about him (its been said a long time and has had zero effect on Lance) or because of Tour rules (who have zero love or affection for Landis) they may be sorely disappointed.

Apologize for the editting to get to points of interest. I hope LA stalls this until the Tour so the exposure gets BRIGHTER. If for no other reason than to put pressure on for a clean Tour. Realistically a Federal investigation will take time before anyone is subpoenaed and testimony taken. LA will not avoid that light of day nor will anyone else.

 

[Anonymous]

And I suggest you remember that the investigation may wind up going both ways. It may very well turn out that Landis winds up on the spot for attempted blackmail. By his own admission he has no proof of what he is saying, and it is sort of hard to get a conviction without evidence.

And for the record, as the basher again go emotional, I don't care one wit whether Lance doped or not. I will call him a doper when he is convicted.

You can think he is a doper all you want. He IS a doper when you actually prove it. Good Luck. An accussation from Landis equates to - just one more accussation.

Maybe something will be come loose as a result of this broadside, but until it does .... Lance ain't a doper - or any of the other riders he has accussed.

So, accept the way the system actually works rather than demanding that I adopt your position sans proof.

And as we will no doubt go through the many accussations, I would like the Lance bashers to include the rebuttals. These have all been looked into be people gunning to take down Lance, and nothing has stuck. Another accussation with even less evidence in support will not change that equation.

I think you miss how a FORUM works. This isn't a court room, so how this SYSTEM works and how the court system works are two different things. You come in here preaching like you are Mr Legal Eagle to all of us, never realizing that you are not in a court room. You are posting on a FORUM. If you don't like how we roll here, there are other places for you to go.

 

[Archibald]

Despite everyone "denying" all accusations, has anyone made comments to the effect that
"I have never doped
I have never witnessed a team mate dope,
I have never sought or been offered advice on how to dope from team mates or team staff,
I have never offered advice on how to dope nor medication to team mates
if any team mate or team trainer or DS had offered advice or medication or i had witnessed the administration of a doping programme i would have reported it to the relevant administrative organisation and doping organisation."

if that statement was true for any of those involved i would have expected them to be saying it, trashing Landis is not any sort of denial.

this is LA all over - he just says "prove it", "I've never tested positive", etc...

as for coroborations, I'm sure O'Reilly, Mr n Mrs Andreu and a few others may well be in the spotlight again...