Landis letter re drug use in cycling

[Archibald]

so where's the threats from Flandis?
most of those emails are from Dr Kay and Messick...

interesting that some are actively mentioning to keep confidential as well as including the confidentiality clause...

just muddies the waters a bit - or tries to...

 

[Archibald]

I am not denyoing what others say am I?

And I am not making a mistake in saying the evidence is not high enough to secure a conviction. It hasn't.

So, prove what Landis is saying is true?

What evidence do you have the Landis is telling the truth?

Are you beginning to see the point?

Are you beginning to see the problem is assuming Floyd is right, but ignoring the possibility that he is wrong?

And if we put all our hopes on Floyd and nothing happens - because he came forward with NO evidence - do we have to listen to the wailing about how broke the system is?

You can have your opinion, but your opinion can be challenged. And if the rebuttal is always - the person disagreeing with me is a flawed human being - well, take a look in the mirror.

YOU have all the evidence you need. THE SYSTEM does not. Claro?

convinced landis is lying aren't you. guilty until proven innocent?
loving the hypocrisy when you reverse it towards lance and his "alleged" doping...

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

As what has been posted time and time again, painfully so, the Michael Ashenden re-test, brought up in the interview with him completely overpowers and trumps the Vrijman report. No, it doesn't "prove" Lance used EPO in that it didn't cause USADA, WADA or the UCI to pursue sanctions against him, or Lance to be charged with a crime, but anyone with any objective mind at all would read it and conclude Lance was definitely on EPO in 1999. No one has ever come up with any logical counter arguments to Ashenden's conclusions on the re-test. The oft repeated arguments I've read against Ashenden's conclusions are:

1. The Vrijman Report cleared Lance anyway, so it doesn't matter.

2. Ashenden has some hidden vendetta against Lance none of his peers believe, but Lance fans do, and should be discredited as a scientist.

3. Regardless of Ashenden's respected knowledge and extensive tests, he's somehow wrong (with no explanation how he's wrong).

For those not in the know, Vrijman is an attorney. Ashenden a world renowned physiologist.

 

[Barrus]

so where's the threats from Flandis?
most of those emails are from Dr Kay and Messick...

interesting that some are actively mentioning to keep confidential as well as including the confidentiality clause...

just muddies the waters a bit - or tries to...

Landis comes across in these mails as a genuine nice guy trying to make everyone atone for their own sins and making sure everyone is in on what he wants to do. This actually makes me believe him more, rather than less

 

[Jonathan]

I am not denyoing what others say am I?

And I am not making a mistake in saying the evidence is not high enough to secure a conviction. It hasn't.

So, prove what Landis is saying is true?

What evidence do you have the Landis is telling the truth?

Does Landis need to prove his innocence of being a liar? I thought anyone was assumed to be innocent until proven guilty. Landis has not been convicted of lying, has he?

Are you beginning to see the point?

Are you beginning to see the problem is assuming Floyd is right, but ignoring the possibility that he is wrong?

I thought about the possibility that Landis didn't tell the truth, but consider it much more likely that he actually did.

And if we put all our hopes on Floyd and nothing happens - because he came forward with NO evidence - do we have to listen to the wailing about how broke the system is?

You can have your opinion, but your opinion can be challenged. And if the rebuttal is always - the person disagreeing with me is a flawed human being - well, take a look in the mirror.

YOU have all the evidence you need. THE SYSTEM does not. Claro?

Again, you don't have to argue about 'the system' with me - that's not my responsibility. Again, nobody has said that Armstrong will be found formally guilty of doping - I don't think he will. Again, since you seemed to have been irked by people ignoring repeated rebuttals, you're showing a startling inability to avoid the mistakes you identify in others.

 

[DenisMenchov]

If there is a person in the World I don`t trust, then it must be Floyd Landis, but on the other hand second person on that list would be Lance Armstrong just in front of MIchael Phelps. SO who TO TRUSt????

 

[Moose McKnuckles]

Releasing these emails in the hope of somehow sliming Floyd has resulted in a massive fail by RadioShack and the Armstrong hacks.

They know they're in deep sh!t.

 

[HL2037]

Landis comes across in these mails as a genuine nice guy trying to make everyone atone for their own sins and making sure everyone is in on what he wants to do. This actually makes me believe him more, rather than less

Agree.

If those emails are all LA's camp have got, then they've got nothing.

 

[Red Lobster]

Yep, you just don't have enough proof for a conviction - so apparently you need some more?

Once again, thank you for referring to the accusssation, and, again, ignoring the rebuttals.

Floyd, whom was once in the cross hairs as a deviant, is not the most honest man in the world because he agrees with you ... but has not provided any evidence to back your claim.

So, are ALL the rider he accussed of doping actually doping?

Levi?

Dave Z?

George?

Contador?

Boonen?

Cadel Evan at the systemic doping BMC Team?

I am sorry, but I will not sign up for all that just to get Lance.

I would reply but I have absolutely no idea what point you are trying to make.

 

[ExRower]

Lindsey and Lance are having a go at it on twitter

 

[thehog]

Lindsey and Lance are having a go at it on twitter

Please print.

 

[VeloCity]

http://rant-your-head-off.com/WordPress/?p=168

Then why was Pound censured and Lance not convicted?

Lance was not "convicted" because (a) the positives were part of an experimental EPO trial and therefore not officially sanctionable (but still clearly showed the presence of EPO in LA's samples and still clearly showed that LA was using EPO during the '99 Tour) and (b) the Vrijman report was a whitewash that was intended from the get-go to "exonerate" Armstrong.

Please take this to the appropriate thread. THis one is about Landis's accussations.

um, you brought it up, dude.

 

[ExRower]

Read from bottom to top:

joelindsey
@lancearmstrong Thanks for the replies. Another (honest) question: why did you say at TOC that you had never given $ to UCI?
half a minute ago via web in reply to lancearmstrong

nyvelocity
http://bit.ly/cXHAjH Team RadioShack releases e-mail exchanges between Floyd Landis and Lance et al. (via @joelindsey)
2 minutes ago via Twitterrific

lancearmstrong
@joelindsey that references the texts he was sending yrs ago in which I did respond, "do what you have to do, I can't help you. Take care."
4 minutes ago via UberTwitter in reply to joelindsey

joelindsey
Mr. Armstrong and others, then, as he has now, told Landis he had nothing to hide...
7 minutes ago via web

joelindsey
@lancearmstrong All respect: your official statement appears to suggest otherwise. Bottom of first paragraph. http://bit.ly/9cm75C
8 minutes ago via web in reply to lancearmstrong

lancearmstrong
@joelindsey I never wrote back...
9 minutes ago via UberTwitter in reply to joelindsey

joelindsey
@lancearmstrong If you're gonna put all that out there, you owe us the courtesy of what you wrote back.
13 minutes ago via web

joelindsey

http://bit.ly/cXHAjH Team RadioShack releases e-mail exchanges between Floyd Landis and Lance et al.
36 minutes ago via web
Reply Retweet

lancearmstrong
Statement from @TeamRadioShack is now up live http://www.teamradioshack.com. Thanks.

 

[ExRower]

lancearmstrong

@joelindsey the question was did I pay off the UCI wrt a pos test in 2002 from TdS (which I didn't contest). Answer - of course not, no way

 

[Cobblestones]

I just read the statement on the Shack website? WTF? Who's writing this trash? a 13 year old? Scratch that, it would be an insult to every teenager.

... Landis accused at least 16 professional cycling individuals and organizations of activity that is baseless and quite simply untrue.

So he accused people of baseless and untrue activity? What does that even mean?

When you continue, there's at least one 'baseless' in every sentence that follows. The style is terrible with sentences going on and on and on.

Bunch of muppets.

 

[offbyone]

Releasing these emails in the hope of somehow sliming Floyd has resulted in a massive fail by RadioShack and the Armstrong hacks.

They know they're in deep sh!t.

I am not so sure that is the intention. It seems more likely that they feel the quicker they get all the "evidence" on the table, the quicker this will disappear. If in fact, these letters are the bulk of Floyd's "evidence", then this is as good as over.

Maybe floyd has some real evidence, but I think not. If he did, I would gander that his blackmailing would have been more effective. This could be the end of this drama. If so, IMO good riddance. Because while many of you are completely obsessed with how this relates to Armstrong, the fact of the matter is that if all this is true it implicates a significant portion of the pro peloton and various agencies. I don't think road cycling needs another setback of this magnitude. It would be a crushing blow and would probably take 5-10 years to recover. Considering how tight the world is right now financially, sponsors only need a small excuse to pull their money out.

Now, if all this implicated doping in 2010, I would have a very different opinion. But it doesn't. So, I don't see how digging up skeletons will benefit cycling.

 

[Mrs John Murphy]

The one thing that does come out of the email exchanges - Landis appears to have already had his meeting with USADA already so I assume he has given them all he has.

 

[ExRower]

joelindsey

@lancearmstrong Absolute clarity is tough in a rapidfire Q&A. I appreciate that. Thanks again for the responses.
less than a minute ago via web in reply to lancearmstrong
Reply Retweet

lancearmstrong
@joelindsey sorry for the confusion.
3 minutes ago via UberTwitter in reply to joelindsey

joelindsey
@lancearmstrong Were you surprised by question about cooperating w/ federal prosecutor? Been contacted/reason to believe one is involved?
3 minutes ago via web in reply to lancearmstrong

joelindsey
@lancearmstrong According to transcript: http://bit.ly/akOkSL question was general. In specific context, a valid answer. Thx for clarifying

 

[Moose McKnuckles]

So, I don't see how digging up skeletons will benefit cycling.

I guess you don't see how revealing decades of child abuse by religious authorities benefits anything either, right?

 

[nvpacchi]

I just read the statement on the Shack website? WTF? Who's writing this trash? a 13 year old? Scratch that, it would be an insult to every teenager.



So he accused people of baseless and untrue activity? What does that even mean?

When you continue, there's at least one 'baseless' in every sentence that follows. The style is terrible with sentences going on and on and on.

Bunch of muppets.

I think they took a page out of Mr. Clemen's book and conveniently 'misremembered' the most important details.

 

[lancaster]

alpe, thanks for the ashenden link, had never seen that before

 

[Aerodynamic]

The emails are polite and courteous, but they do appear to show that Landis was suggesting he be allowed to ride the TOC or he would make public his claims about Armstrong. Passive aggressive.

 

[Moose McKnuckles]

The emails are polite and courteous, but they do appear to show that Landis was suggesting he be allowed to ride the TOC or he would make public his claims about Armstrong. Passive aggressive.

Another muppet has joined.

 

[flicker]

When good Mennonites go bad.

In my opinion Floyd Landis is a madman.

He lost his credibility with me when his goon threatened LeMond before Flandis hearing.
Until then I gave him the benefit of the doubt. I believe the top nine behind him were doping in the tour thus a level playing field.

Floyd was thusly burned by having his victory erased.
Floyds goal in the trial was to bankrupt WADA and USADA.
However for Floyd to confided in about his doping to LeMond tells me he is stupid. Because LeMond is honest and does promote honest and clean sport. Floyd wanted Greg to be a part of the cheating. Greg chose not to participate. Floyds goon threatens LeMond. After everything I respect Greg LeMond more than ever.

Ever since his guilty sentence I see a bad man a liar. He lies in court is a proven liar. Sociopath and ill man Floyd.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

I am not so sure that is the intention. It seems more likely that they feel the quicker they get all the "evidence" on the table, the quicker this will disappear. If in fact, these letters are the bulk of Floyd's "evidence", then this is as good as over.

Maybe floyd has some real evidence, but I think not. If he did, I would gander that his blackmailing would have been more effective. This could be the end of this drama. If so, IMO good riddance. Because while many of you are completely obsessed with how this relates to Armstrong, the fact of the matter is that if all this is true it implicates a significant portion of the pro peloton and various agencies. I don't think road cycling needs another setback of this magnitude. It would be a crushing blow and would probably take 5-10 years to recover. Considering how tight the world is right now financially, sponsors only need a small excuse to pull their money out.

Now, if all this implicated doping in 2010, I would have a very different opinion. But it doesn't. So, I don't see how digging up skeletons will benefit cycling.

Ah, newsflash.....

You do realise most of the athletes and people in power that Landis has named are still very much involved in the sport?

It also shows - what many of us already thought - that Pro Cycling is corrupt from the top down, if nothing is done to change that then guess what happens?