Positively False

[LeakyLens]

Has anybody read the Floyd Landis book? Is it worth the read?

Obviously it's full of lies, but I was thinking, after reading the PK transcript that it may be interesting to compare both texts to see what exactly he felt the need to lie about. Clearly, he denies doping, but I wonder what else is in the book that he lied about, personal relationships, casual conversations, chance meetings.

I don't know, just thought it might be an interesting retrospective exercise.

What do people think?

 

[Berzin]

Not worth reading at this point.

Better to hold your horses and wait until the allegations and indictments are made public.

I's going to be a lot more interesting watching these sleazy characters slither around like nutrias with their lawyer-prepared comments about "having no comment" and "Landis has an axe to grind".

 

[SC1990]

I'd rather he refunded everyone who bought it their money back.

 

[LeakyLens]

Well, obviously he misled the buying public in terms of the factual nature of the content.

But in terms of a snapshot of where Landis was in his life at that moment and what he felt compelled to lie about to 'fix everything' (as he phrased it in the Kimmage interview), it is still worth a read?

 

[LeakyLens]

As Landis also said in the interview, all the stuff in it about growing up as a Mennonite is all accurate, and he said he's proud of that part of the book. I'm just kind of fascinated by him now having read the Kimmage transcript.

 

[Roninho]

I'd rather he refunded everyone who bought it their money back.

Well, they could always put it in the "fiction" section in the book stores

 

[flicker]

Has anybody read the Floyd Landis book? Is it worth the read?

Obviously it's full of lies, but I was thinking, after reading the PK transcript that it may be interesting to compare both texts to see what exactly he felt the need to lie about. Clearly, he denies doping, but I wonder what else is in the book that he lied about, personal relationships, casual conversations, chance meetings.

I don't know, just thought it might be an interesting retrospective exercise.

What do people think?

Most definitely worth the read. I have a copy for sale, they are collectors items.

 

[fatandfast]

It is a good book. I was given and autographed copy purchased at a fund raiser at Brooklyn Brewing Company I also have a photo of Landis standing with local riders at the the legal fund raiser. The book is available for less than 3 bucks online. I will treasure my copy forever

 

[Orvieto]

Not worth reading at this point.

Better to hold your horses and wait until the allegations and indictments are made public.

I's going to be a lot more interesting watching these sleazy characters slither around like nutrias with their lawyer-prepared comments about "having no comment" and "Landis has an axe to grind".

I have to say, I'm more interested in reading it now than I ever was. It'll make an interesting comparison to the Kimmage interview.

I will say that this for the book, it's what finally convinced me to cancel my Bicycling subscription or at least Loren Mooney's August 2010 editorial did. Mooney co-wrote Positively False with Landis. Her editorial when Landis admitted doping was self pitying. I worked so hard, she complained, and Landis lied to me. My reaction was to wonder why she hadn't done her job better, why she hadn't brought some healthy skepticism, why hadn't she checked the many other sources.
This was the 2010 TDF preview edition of the magazine. It was full of Nissan and Radio Shack ads and had LA and Contador on the cover. Mooney claimed "Doping, as a topic, sparks so much frenzied noise in the media that it now repels me". It's not the doping itself. It's the media noise that she finds repulsive. Fittingly "we decided to leave the scandal out of our Tour De France preview."

 

[SC1990]

I have to say, I'm more interested in reading it now than I ever was. It'll make an interesting comparison to the Kimmage interview.

I will say that this for the book, it's what finally convinced me to cancel my Bicycling subscription or at least Loren Mooney's August 2010 editorial did. Mooney co-wrote Positively False with Landis. Her editorial when Landis admitted doping was self pitying. I worked so hard, she complained, and Landis lied to me. My reaction was to wonder why she hadn't done her job better, why she hadn't brought some healthy skepticism, why hadn't she checked the many other sources.
This was the 2010 TDF preview edition of the magazine. It was full of Nissan and Radio Shack ads and had LA and Contador on the cover. Mooney claimed "Doping, as a topic, sparks so much frenzied noise in the media that it now repels me". It's not the doping itself. It's the media noise that she finds repulsive. Fittingly "we decided to leave the scandal out of our Tour De France preview."

Easy to say now maybe, with hindsight, but her job was to ghost write Landis' views, so at that time I doubt suddenly going 'you know what Floyd, and going to make this a biography and do some investigating, I'm sure you won't fire me...Floyd? Floyd?! FLOOYYYDD!'

 

[Cobblestoned]

Never read that book.

Can someone post the Top10 of funniest things/lies ?

 

[flicker]

Never read that book.

Can someone post the Top10 of funniest things/lies ?

I hear you can get Positivley False on books on tape now. It is narrated by Al Pachino and Joe Peschi.

 

[Granville57]

I'll be keeping my signed copy.

I'd rather he refunded everyone who bought it their money back.

I'm fine with my investment. It was hilarious at points, and that's worth the price right there. I am, and always have been, unapologetically interested in Floyd's story. Am I a fan? Sure, call it that. Am I stupid? I don't think so. Apparently I'm smarter than Loren Mooney.

This was the 2010 TDF preview edition of the magazine. It was full of Nissan and Radio Shack ads and had LA and Contador on the cover. Mooney claimed "Doping, as a topic, sparks so much frenzied noise in the media that it now repels me". It's not the doping itself. It's the media noise that she finds repulsive. Fittingly "we decided to leave the scandal out of our Tour De France preview."

Chapter 11 Presumed Guilty is where he addresses doping head on. He states, "I did not use performance-enhancing drugs in the 2006 Tour de France or any other time in my career." Even back then, wanting to believe in the guy, I thought that was a bit too much like "I never had sexual relations with that women, Ms Lewinsky." It just seemed so scripted and thrown in at the behest of his lawyers. I didn't buy it. But I realized there was a ton more to the story.

I always thought it was unfair when reporters would ask him "Have you ever doped?" How could he possibly answer that truthfully without setting off an explosion? Not mention, the question was totally irrelevant. The question was , Did he dope for the 2006 Tour. More specifically, the only real question at stake was, Did he use what he was accused of using? That was the only valid question. But that's what makes these things so messy.

I re-read the entire book immediately after his confession came out last May. It was fascinating to see it in a whole new light, now knowing how his managers and trainers were all in on it.

Is it worth reading? Absolutely if you are interested in Floyd, the person. Because there is a lot of truth on the pages and, at this point, I think it's pretty easy to separate fact from fiction. It offers another piece to the puzzle.

From a lying standpoint, it also offers of view of how an athlete can skew their side of the story. It makes it easier to spot the next one.

 

[BotanyBay]

Check it out from the library, but do not buy it.

It's worth reading to learn more about the daily life of a water carrier and hired motor. You understand his money woes, how a sheltered kid suddenly thrust himself into a world he was not prepared for. You can see his lack of worldly adult experience.

It's also one of the first books to showcase how Lance and the Hog are really just complete jerks.

 

[Maxiton]

Not worth reading at this point.

<snipped for brevity>

Wasn't worth reading at that point, either.

Most definitely worth the read. I have a copy for sale, they are collectors items.

Can be found in the remainder bin for $1.98 US. Get 'em while they're hot.

<snipped for brevity>
It's also one of the first books to showcase how Lance and the Hog are really just complete jerks.

Now that might make it worth reading. Though frankly I didn't need a book to tell me that.

 

[BotanyBay]

Wasn't worth reading at that point, either.



Can be found in the remainder bin for $1.98 US. Get 'em while they're hot.



Now that might make it worth reading. Though frankly I didn't need a book to tell me that.

The best part of the book is Floyd having to go into a LBS to buy tires. The guy is a top pro cyclist and he can't get his bike fixed, nor is he given enough supplies, shorts, jerseys. Heck, at one point, he can't even get a decent bike. And saying something about it just got him deeper on the shiite list.

And guys like Tyler and Kevin, the wusses that they were, they just sat and took it.

 

[python]

Never read that book.

Can someone post the Top10 of funniest things/lies ?

ask d brower for his opinion. he may have a few discounted copies left and he claimed we needed to trust landis did not dope whilst verifying everything. he actively helped to sell the book and perpetuated the false doping theories in the book.

he is an expert.

 

[python]

Has anybody read the Floyd Landis book? Is it worth the read?

Obviously it's full of lies, but I was thinking, after reading the PK transcript that it may be interesting to compare both texts to see what exactly he felt the need to lie about. Clearly, he denies doping, but I wonder what else is in the book that he lied about, personal relationships, casual conversations, chance meetings.

I don't know, just thought it might be an interesting retrospective exercise.

What do people think?

ask d brower for his opinion. he may have a few discounted copies left and he claimed we needed to trust landis did not dope whilst verifying everything. he actively helped to sell the book and perpetuated the false doping theories in the book.

he is an expert.

 

[Granville57]

I'll offer this, for what it's worth.

I met Floyd at Battenkill, which was a really interesting time for him, April 18, 2010. This was just after his emails had been sent but just before they went public.

He was totally at ease and appeared to be comfortable with himself. He was accessible both before and after the race, and genuinely approachable by anyone that showed an interest.

He animated the race that day, instigated the winning break, and crossed the line in second (with a huge gap to third) with a punctuated exhale and head-bow of extreme exhaustion from the effort put forth. He was greeted by nothing but applause.

Post race, he mingled with the crowd on his way to the podium and was taken by the appearance of someone's pet corgi; he seemed happy to be there.

I had a photo taken with him and he confidently put his arm around me as if we were old friends. He looked to be lean and in very good shape (contrary to many rumors at the time). I was also a bit surprised by how strong he felt (I realize this opens me up to some ridicule, but I couldn't care less). He was both humble, and generous with his time.

Does that mean he didn't lie to the world? No.
Does that mean he's a "good" person by everyone's standards? No.
Does that mean I understand all that motivates this man? No.

Was my own personal experience with Floyd Landis real? Yes.
Are there worse people in the world? Hell, there are worse people just in cycling.

 

[Anonymous]

It is a good book. I was given and autographed copy purchased at a fund raiser at Brooklyn Brewing Company I also have a photo of Landis standing with local riders at the the legal fund raiser. The book is available for less than 3 bucks online. I will treasure my copy forever

The funniest part of this is that you bought the book at a fund raiser. You were completely incapable of seeing his lies then (though many of us did), and now you are completely convinced he is lying about his doping (and those around him)...man. Like I've said before, those of you who were fooled then, and are hammering him now have shown that your level of assessment regarding the motives of another leave a lot to be desired. Dang.

You bought a book at a fundraiser, if I were next to you, I would just point and laugh until I couldn't breathe, then catch my breath and point and laugh again. PT Barnum was a genius.

 

[dbrower]

ask d brower for his opinion. he may have a few discounted copies left and he claimed we needed to trust landis did not dope whilst verifying everything. he actively helped to sell the book and perpetuated the false doping theories in the book.

he is an expert.

If you ignore anything to do with the doping, it's a good enough read, though I think the kimmage interview gives you as good a view -- and it's not much shorter than the book.

I still have problems with the way doping tests are done and adjudicated, and I'm glad to have seen the sausage machine in action. And I told Landis on more than one occasion that if he had been doping, the scorched earth defense was pretty fsck'ing stupid. I also hope he's not holding onto the "no testosterone" claim to spare my feelings (or those of similarly placed people).

As examples of the problems with testing a adjudication, just look at Contador. Python discusses defenses that follow the pattern of the Landis case. I'm glad he is into transparent process without any conflating agendas.

-dB

 

[fatandfast]

The funniest part of this is that you bought the book at a fund raiser. You were completely incapable of seeing his lies then (though many of us did), and now you are completely convinced he is lying about his doping (and those around him)...man. Like I've said before, those of you who were fooled then, and are hammering him now have shown that your level of assessment regarding the motives of another leave a lot to be desired. Dang.

You bought a book at a fundraiser, if I were next to you, I would just point and laugh until I couldn't breathe, then catch my breath and point and laugh again. PT Barnum was a genius.

Man I am glad you are not next to me..but others who have been have had that same laughing problem. Even more painful because of beer or single malt that makes everything funnier. I was unable to go to the fund raiser and gave the cash to another teammate to get me the book.. I sent him a couple of high school girl style emails making sure he didn't blow my cash on booze and beer and forget my book. I had ridden w Dr. Baker and lots of other people that called Landis a friend. I have obviously strong opinions about the subject. I didn't and don't care about Landis's motives. I have seen a little that goes on from the national team selection to OTC camp invites and some US pro team inner workings. My biggest problem with this whole thing that seems to grow bigger and bigger is the the hero part of it. Landis was never trying to fool anybody..he just had to play his part and he did..and when the playing was over he just put on another costume and started playing a totally different kind of victim. If Landis committed a different crime, rape,robbery.killed somebody drunk driving,stole money and put an employer out of business..whatever I am sorry is a start..but this ok you are brand new,clean slate great guy is being to easily given away..but like I said.I will stay away from you because in a room w others who know my Flandis book story it always involves laughing until crying. If the inscription was not so personal I would scan it and post it...I am so ashamed

 

[python]

snip

Python discusses defenses that follow the pattern of the Landis case.

you got this right. i can discuss freely without advocating false premises but as i said in the appropriate thread you and your intentionally pretentious positions are the remotest thing on my mind when i freely discuss and express my opinion. landis's defence was a disaster you helped to achieve and it has little to do contador.

I'm glad he is into transparent process without any conflating agendas.

i am glad too that i never followed your 'trust but varify' model of 'transparency'.

 

[Orvieto]

Easy to say now maybe, with hindsight, but her job was to ghost write Landis' views, so at that time I doubt suddenly going 'you know what Floyd, and going to make this a biography and do some investigating, I'm sure you won't fire me...Floyd? Floyd?! FLOOYYYDD!'

True. Hindsight makes the decision look easy, but there's ghostwriting and there's ghostwriting. She put her name on the cover. If my name was on the line I would exercise a little more journalistic rigour. What's interesting about Landis is how everyone who meets him seems to like him. He seems genuinely disarming.

I can forgive her for not getting the story right the first time. It's her reaction that most annoys me. She doesn't want to go back and get the story right. She wants to have us forget it all, because doping is just media noise.

 

[dbrower]

you got this right. i can discuss freely without advocating false premises

You'll appear more credible with that kind of assertion if you take the 'witchhunter' off your avatar.

-dB