_Zipp0_ said:Thanks for the link - well written, thoughtful story.
And Lance and Johan and the rest calling Floyd a screwball nut who needs professional help (he may be a nut that needs help indeed) does NOTHING to address the VERY SPECIFIC allegations in the emails written by Floyd.
The powers that be in cycling sem to be circling the wagons around the goose that laid the golden egg.
benoit joachim?Clemson Cycling said:I think all we should take out of what Floyd (who would not be considered credible on a witness stand in a US courtroom) said was yes US Postal/Discovery were dirty just like every team in pro cycling. The amazing thing is the only rider that was ever caught on Johan's watch was Li Fuyu earlier this year.
ScienceIsCool said:Okay. Cite a credible source for anything you just wrote and it would be interesting to consider. Cite the actual values for Lance's cortisone levels, so that we can verify it was 1/1000 of the sanctionable limits. Otherwise, your statements are not worth considering as they are full of factual errors.
red_flanders said:I think you miss my point, friend.
Martin318is said:Well, given the UCI is pretty embarassingly implicated in protecting Lance in the Landis claims, and you are citing the UCI as a source for the cortisone test being under the limit, and given we know that Lance was able to obtain a TUE after the test failure, I could see how someone would assume the point you were trying to make is that its highly likely the test result was actually over the limit....
But seriously, Phil and Paul are the cycling equivalent of Chemical Ali now...