Floyd Landis Vindicated!

Since 2001, over 90,000 cyclist's have joined Cycling Forums to discuss topics from general cycling to equipment, training, racing and travel or vacation destinations (especially in europe during the tour de france). We also feature an great deals in our online store, 100's of articles, classifieds and product reviews.

The saddest thing about the whole Landis affair is that it now seems to have come down to "The French tampered with the sample" for those believing Floyd is innocent. It's pretty pathetic for people to start insinuating that it has something to do with Iraq or anti-Americanism in France too. Get a life.

Looking at it rationally the Landis positive really fu&*ed the Tour as far as credibility is concerned. There has even been talk in French politics of cancelling it in the future. The "tampered sample brigade" should never underestimate just how important the Tour is culturally and economically in France, and how disgusted and, frankly, worried all the Frenchmen in charge of the Tour were when Landis's test result came through. This scandal puts something much more important than Floyd's career and integrity in peril, and the idea that the French would deliberately sabotage their own national sporting showpiece just to stop an American winning is ridiculous.

clip.........
Looking at it rationally the Landis positive really fu&*ed the Tour as far as credibility is concerned. ......clipWould you say that it falls primarily on Landis or doesn't the pre race scandal of Ullrich and others also taint the tour as well? To me the tour started off as a disappointment and the ending just made it all the more sour, but I did enjoy watching parts of it anyway.

...or doesn't the pre race scandal of Ullrich and others also taint the tour as well?
Ullrich and others didn't race... Landis did, and made insane comeback, and got busted... just a lil different to ulrich and basso :D

Would you say that it falls primarily on Landis or doesn't the pre race scandal of Ullrich and others also taint the tour as well? To me the tour started off as a disappointment and the ending just made it all the more sour, but I did enjoy watching parts of it anyway.


Cycling as a whole has been tainted. If you don't believe me then ask some of the riders that are trying to find sponsorship and look at how many sponsor have dropped out.
There are many ways for large companies to spend money and they can find another sport.
Sad times!

That's why the Landis affair hit so hard - it was supposed to be the Tour of redemption to redeem the sport of cycling after Operation Puerto....and then things got even worse.

I think we can draw two conclusions -

1) Riders who want to win the hardest races probably dope, Americans too.

2) The "red blooded", SUV driving, Bible bashing, war hungry, ultra-patriotic God Bless America attitude has nothing to do with cycling and doesn't belong in a rational debate about whether or not a man took drugs to win a bike race. Go and cheer at a lethal execution or something...

That's why the Landis affair hit so hard - it was supposed to be the Tour of redemption to redeem the sport of cycling after Operation Puerto....and then things got even worse.

I think we can draw two conclusions -

1) Riders who want to win the hardest races probably dope, Americans too.

2) The "red blooded", SUV driving, Bible bashing, war hungry, ultra-patriotic God Bless America attitude has nothing to do with cycling and doesn't belong in a rational debate about whether or not a man took drugs to win a bike race. Go and cheer at a lethal execution or something...


If the German prosecutor has his way ,it will be Jan's execution.

Presently MLB and cycling for the most part are sharing the spotlight for athletes using PED's, but it seems like cycling seems far more scandalous than any other sport by the way information is released to the public.

I am not saying one sport is more right than another, but from my reading perspective in the media it seems like cycling is the one that will be hurt the worst.

MLB is not dependent on sponsors and like jhuskey states where will the support come from once the sponsors pull out of cycling?

It seems like to me that the authorities for cycling could have been a bit more discreet in trying to implement testing programs and punishing those who break the rules, but the way all of this is being played out in the public eye it seems like too risky for big corporate sponsors and they don't need their corporate names trashed along with the team that is in violation.

You're a git. If this is true, then don't show up... Pull all yanks out of euro cycle sport... Having yanks and yank brands in international cycling, truely makes it international...

In the '80s, USA track cycling team at the olympics had million dollar bikes made by nasa and a blood swapping caravan... The team would sit in the van with their blood being constantly run through a machine till the very last second before the race. This was legal at the time, and shows yanks don't mind being inovators...

ppl don't want yanks not to win, they just hate the over-patriotic denial inherent in yanks that automatically says landis musta been framed and setup...Yeah, I see you're point a little, but don't blame "the yanks," blame USA Cycling and US Pro Cycling.

The idea that the French would deliberately sabotage their own national sporting showpiece just to stop an American winning is ridiculous.It's obviously not the French government or even the TdF officials...it only takes one guy at one lab.

I am far from an over enthusiastic bible thumpin conservative. I am probably one of the most liberal reformist minded Americans you will ever meet. I believe that the facts in this case point toward Floyd's innocence. Perhaps there is some masterminded conspiracy aimed at Damning the TDF and Floyd is just a pawn! Ever think of that??????? Maybe the Americans are trying to bring down the french by destroying the tour while throwing off the scent by Damining one of there own!!!!!!

Oh I do love a media conspiracist. Here's my standard reply to media conspiracist besides, "you're being ignorant."

...Anyway, back to the issue, which is, how people perceive the inner workings of the media, particularly mainstream newspapers and magazines. I've worked as a reporter and editor for daily newspapers and weekly/monthly magazines around the USA and I've sat through hours of editorial meetings (called budgets) and I've never heard anyone say, "okay people, let's figure out how we can spin the news today." It doesn't happen.

Newspaper reporters and editors, once they rise to the level of LA Times -- and even before that -- are not biased. You're going to have to take my word on this. If they're biased, they get fired. It's a matter of ethics, which starts in J101 and in every college journalism class there after. If they're biased, and secretly grinding an ax in their reporting, it'll be obvious and the editor or publisher will give them the boot.

Don't get the news pages confused with op/ed pages where anything goes. That's why, on bigger newspapers, reporters and section editors don't write op/ed pieces. (side note: on NY Times newspapers, the op/ed office is separated from the rest of the newsroom). It's an obvious conflict of interest. Small town weekly newspapers, you'll see reporters and section editors writing op/ed pieces due to labor shortages, but it's still wrong. Bigger newspapers, it doesn't happen. Reporters report. They don't spin. If they have opinions, which they do, those opinions should not be perceivable to the reader. If they are, they're fired.

Now, do reporters and editors make mistakes? All the time. And why? Because they're thinking about punching out, or they get bad information, or because they don't have a firm handle on the information or a grasp of the situation, like the case with LA Times. The newsroom is like any other work place. People make mistakes for a variety of reasons. When someone down at the Ford plant installs a part wrong, is that a conspiracy? Mistakes happen. People start thinking about punching out or they just get sloppy. There's no Rush Limbaugh or Air America media conspiracy going on. That's just a bunch of crap to sell radio advertising.

It's over simplification to believe that the reporters and editors for the LA Times have it in for Lance and that they're willing to prostitute their ethics so they can make money for their newspaper or work a book deal. Same thing with the French press. It's obvious jingoism to say that, just because Lance, an American, won the Tour, a French race, that the French media is out to get him (side note: they never went after LeMond). It makes me cringe when Lance alludes to that nonsense like he did` repeatedly at the ESPY awards last night. He's playing to jingoistic, none-thinking Americans because, really, aside from those in the cycling community, that's his fan base.

Now, about TV news. Look, if you get all your news-related information from the boob tube, you get what you get. TV news, by in large, caters to people of average intelligence, and in America, that means average folks encumbered with buying power. These people aren't thinking about the intricacies of world or sporting politics. They're thinking about what kind of golf clubs to buy or the color of their new kitchen cabinets or how much horsepower that new riding lawnmower has. They don't have time to get mired in details about two big fat messy wars much less whether LA doped.

Come on. Drop the media conspiracy crap.
One more addition to this...If you are below the L.A. times and aren't selling anything either, then you get fired. Its called revenue! You need it to pay the bills. Everything in a capitalistic society is designed and needs to make a profit! So, the media wouldn't even carry this story if it wasn't going to get ratings, sell papers, or create an advantagous market some how.

I can confirm jhuskeys post. Something must have happened, people get very nervous if i ask questions about the samples and the rumour is getting louder and louder. It's different from the Hamilton case were a lot of insiders made jokes about his defence, this time people get nervous (they also get nervous if you ask the right questions about Puerto....)


Landis didn't challenge the B sample.

If the sample identity numbers were askew, why didn't he challenge the B sample result?
By not challenging he has let two months go by - with his reputation lying in tatters.
That's of course if this "new information" is true.

if it's true now - it must have been true back then.

Also it's my recollection that the opening and testing of the B sample was done in the presence of Landis lawyer too.

One more addition to this...If you are below the L.A. times and aren't selling anything either, then you get fired. Its called revenue! You need it to pay the bills. Everything in a capitalistic society is designed and needs to make a profit! So, the media wouldn't even carry this story if it wasn't going to get ratings, sell papers, or create an advantagous market some how.Okay, give me an example.

It's an overly simplistic explanation for hearing news you don't want to hear.

Look, if you've ever spent any time inside a newsroom you'd drop this, "it's all about selling newspapers" crap. It doesn't happen. No one in the newsroom cares about how many newspapers are being sold. It doesn't enter into the equation.

Media-conspiracy is a cop out. It just doesn't exist.

Here's where people get confused. Many believe that, since the LATimes has no interest in running cycling results and stories about the classics or the Vuelta or anything less than the Tour, but they will run a story about Armstrong doping, then the paper is trying to make money off Armstrong's good name.

The fact is, the general public at large doesn't care about cycling. They have an interest in Armstrong. Knowing their audience, why would the LAT run stories about things their audience could care less about. They're not catering to a niche market. That's for Velonews and the like. The LAT and all other newspapers, big or small, identify their audience and deliver what they believe their audience wants and sometimes needs to know. Sports is entertainment, so that last bit doesn't apply.

Believe me, no one sits down in any editorial meeting and decides to run a story -- any story -- because they think it's going to sell newspapers or because they think it's going to further a political agenda. The reason is, morally ethical people would get up and walk out. In most the newsrooms I've worked at, that would be just about everyone. Every journalist knows that it's wrong to have those types of discussion and do those types of things.

Media conspiracy bias: it does not happen.

There is no media conspiracy. There are media that were taking over by other companies, re-organized (less personell) and a lot of journalists are under pressure (time is money) and that's mostly the reason that stories are published without enough research (at least in Germany that's the case..).



Okay, give me an example.

It's an overly simplistic explanation for hearing news you don't want to hear.

Look, if you've ever spent any time inside a newsroom you'd drop this, "it's all about selling newspapers" crap. It doesn't happen. No one in the newsroom cares about how many newspapers are being sold. It doesn't enter into the equation.

Media-conspiracy is a cop out. It just doesn't exist.

Here's where people get confused. Many believe that, since the LATimes has no interest in running cycling results and stories about the classics or the Vuelta or anything less than the Tour, but they will run a story about Armstrong doping, then the paper is trying to make money off Armstrong's good name.

The fact is, the general public at large doesn't care about cycling. They have an interest in Armstrong. Knowing their audience, why would the LAT run stories about things their audience could care less about. They're not catering to a niche market. That's for Velonews and the like. The LAT and all other newspapers, big or small, identify their audience and deliver what they believe their audience wants and sometimes needs to know. Sports is entertainment, so that last bit doesn't apply.

Believe me, no one sits down in any editorial meeting and decides to run a story -- any story -- because they think it's going to sell newspapers or because they think it's going to further a political agenda. The reason is, morally ethical people would get up and walk out. In most the newsrooms I've worked at, that would be just about everyone. Every journalist knows that it's wrong to have those types of discussion and do those types of things.

Media conspiracy bias: it does not happen.

Oh I do love a media conspiracist. Here's my standard reply to media conspiracist besides, "you're being ignorant."

...Anyway, back to the issue, which is, how people perceive the inner workings of the media, particularly mainstream newspapers and magazines. I've worked as a reporter and editor for daily newspapers and weekly/monthly magazines around the USA and I've sat through hours of editorial meetings (called budgets) and I've never heard anyone say, "okay people, let's figure out how we can spin the news today." It doesn't happen.

Newspaper reporters and editors, once they rise to the level of LA Times -- and even before that -- are not biased. You're going to have to take my word on this. If they're biased, they get fired. It's a matter of ethics, which starts in J101 and in every college journalism class there after. If they're biased, and secretly grinding an ax in their reporting, it'll be obvious and the editor or publisher will give them the boot.

Don't get the news pages confused with op/ed pages where anything goes. That's why, on bigger newspapers, reporters and section editors don't write op/ed pieces. (side note: on NY Times newspapers, the op/ed office is separated from the rest of the newsroom). It's an obvious conflict of interest. Small town weekly newspapers, you'll see reporters and section editors writing op/ed pieces due to labor shortages, but it's still wrong. Bigger newspapers, it doesn't happen. Reporters report. They don't spin. If they have opinions, which they do, those opinions should not be perceivable to the reader. If they are, they're fired.

Now, do reporters and editors make mistakes? All the time. And why? Because they're thinking about punching out, or they get bad information, or because they don't have a firm handle on the information or a grasp of the situation, like the case with LA Times. The newsroom is like any other work place. People make mistakes for a variety of reasons. When someone down at the Ford plant installs a part wrong, is that a conspiracy? Mistakes happen. People start thinking about punching out or they just get sloppy. There's no Rush Limbaugh or Air America media conspiracy going on. That's just a bunch of crap to sell radio advertising.

It's over simplification to believe that the reporters and editors for the LA Times have it in for Lance and that they're willing to prostitute their ethics so they can make money for their newspaper or work a book deal. Same thing with the French press. It's obvious jingoism to say that, just because Lance, an American, won the Tour, a French race, that the French media is out to get him (side note: they never went after LeMond). It makes me cringe when Lance alludes to that nonsense like he did` repeatedly at the ESPY awards last night. He's playing to jingoistic, none-thinking Americans because, really, aside from those in the cycling community, that's his fan base.

Now, about TV news. Look, if you get all your news-related information from the boob tube, you get what you get. TV news, by in large, caters to people of average intelligence, and in America, that means average folks encumbered with buying power. These people aren't thinking about the intricacies of world or sporting politics. They're thinking about what kind of golf clubs to buy or the color of their new kitchen cabinets or how much horsepower that new riding lawnmower has. They don't have time to get mired in details about two big fat messy wars much less whether LA doped.

Come on. Drop the media conspiracy crap.one of the largest and most influencial newspapers in america, the new york times, is 100% biased against conservatives, and totally misreports the war, wake up

one of the largest and most influencial newspapers in america, the new york times, is 100% biased against conservatives, and totally misreports the war, wake upYeah, I used to work for them.

And your examples of this 100 percent bias would be?

Would it be, "It's just common knowledge, dude. Come on!"

And the war? What a mess. And this coming from a someone who actually served on the ground in the middle east (82nd AB, 3rd Ranger Bat., 46Q attached -- JTF Somalia) I'm sure my boys are enjoying themselves over there, sleeping on the ground, eating MREs, watching their buddys get their arms and legs blown off and killed, rotating in for up to 18 months and then rotating back out for six then back for 12. It's great watching your kids grow up via video tape.

Boys who never had the balls to go down to the recruiter station and sign up are always the biggest hawks. Our veep is the perfect example. I signed up because I needed a fucking job, not because I was a hero or patriotic. There were a few whack jobs who were the exception, but most everyone I served with fit into that category.

I don't suppose you served in the military, but you probably wish you had. Guys like you don't even make it past basic, much less jump school, air assult school, AIT... Never met a rich kid in the military. Not enlisted anyway.

Don't get me started on that goddamn war.

Yeah, I used to work for them.

And your examples of this 100 percent bias would be?

Would it be, "It's just common knowledge, dude. Come on!"

And the war? What a mess. And this coming from a someone who actually served on the ground in the middle east (82nd AB, 3rd Ranger Bat., 46Q attached -- JTF Somalia) I'm sure my boys are enjoying themselves over there, sleeping on the ground, eating MREs, watching their buddys get their arms and legs blown off and killed, rotating in for up to 18 months and then rotating back out for six then back for 12. It's great watching your kids grow up via video tape.

Boys who never had the balls to go down to the recruiter station and sign up are always the biggest hawks. Our veep is the perfect example. I signed up because I needed a fucking job, not because I was a hero or patriotic. There were a few whack jobs who were the exception, but most everyone I served with fit into that category.

I don't suppose you served in the military, but you probably wish you had. Guys like you don't even make it past basic, much less jump school, air assult school, AIT... Never met a rich kid in the military. Not enlisted anyway.

Don't get me started on that goddamn war.
I never worked in a newsroom...but I was a bartender where journalists hung out. They are not men of morality. They are men of opinion. Most people around them saw the journalists as pariahs.... {And excessivly cheap ] The world of journalistic morality can be summed up with the following two words.....Jason Blair.

I studied advertising during my university years. We used to laugh and call ourselves the "propagandists." Many of the articles written about todays hot story of "doping" are pieces of propaganda to sell newspapers. The references to Armstrong are being used to sell newspapers. Armstrong sells, "Frankie" does not. No one gives a shit about Frankie and if he doped. What they care about is an attempt to tie him to Armstrong and dope. The majority of cyclists in America could not even pick "Frankie" out in a police line-up. So why did the NYT's run his story. They knew by using the tie-in to Armstrong the story would play. And it has.

Frankie is not a good guy. He cheated. He only came forward under the pressure of being called on the carpet by the lawyers representing Armstrong. His wife was protrayed in the trial and media as she is ...a nutcase.....

Frankie needs to be used as an example..... he should be banned pernmantly from the world of professional cycling. He needs to be sued by Motorola to re-gain the financial rewards he recieved during an act of fraud. Possibly felony fraud.

Gentlemen,there is a fine line between facts and truth and it is up to us to decide what exemplifies a preponderance of evidence that is defined only by careful examination of individual items presented as factual and authentic proof as they may relate to pertinent revelance.
In my estimation...............we should flip a coin and see who buys the next round.
I am staunch on my position and will not yield to adverse persuasion.
I hope I have had success in my effort to say nothing as I do not have definitive answer that will satisfy everyone.
Lets hope pro cycling survives this mess!

It does speed up the body's ability to repair itself... hence stage 16/17 results...

2 + 2 = 4

If you're going to hang stage 16 out as a litmus test, Floyd's stage 16 bonking performance suggest no PED.

It would seem as though are French friends were at it again. This time I think that they definately went to far though. As the dust is settling it would appear that the "B" sample is not even Landis sample it has some how mysteriously be mixed up and that codes on the container don not match. THIS OF COURSE IS BECAUSE IT WAS TAMPERED WITH! As for his positive "A" sample only one in four tests of that sample resulted in a positive and this positive result seems to be representitive of a poor test procedure by those wonderful sceintists at our favorite Frence lab! It would seem as though poor Floyd was wrongly draged through MUD of the cycling world. Can you say lawsuit!!! Anyone who knows the cycling world knows that now no mater how well vindicated Floyd is there will always be those who think he cheated the system somehow! Some will always label him a "Doper". This is unfortunate because the story never made sense testosterone just does not work for any short term results. I read a couple theories online about blood bag mix ups and these were really the only theories that made sense in terms of why and how he would have doped! Again it would now seem that he will be exonerated as he should be! I can once again say that I watch and was inspired by the greatest Tour De France comeback of all time! Thanks Floyd!
:)
Yeah, I'm sure that was Elvis Presley's Caddy parked at the local store as well ...