Floyd Landis

alienator

No nothing was proven. It was arbitrated. There was no trial.

That's easy enough to see. I don't know whether he's guilty or not. I do know that nothing was proven. But hey, we don't need that, we just need to accuse a bunch o' people. That's how things get done.

If anyone doesn't think the process was and is completely fucked, well, enjoy your pollyanna existence.

Crankyfeet

The BCS college football bowl determination process is farked. But that doesn't mean that the best team can't still win it. Yes.. Landis' whole defence was aimed at creating enough doubt in enough specific stages of the process, to try to get unthinking people to lose confidence in the result. That was done because a thinking person would determine that they [Landis' team] had to explain how a false positive occurred on numerous IRMS tests that showed traces of synthetic testosterone. They didn't attack that point because it was damning incontrovertible evidence. Instead they chose the Chewbacca defense.



An analogy, though probably a little exaggerated, would be a rapist who had been DNA matched to the sperm found in his victim, arguing that his case should be thrown out because the police were so incompetent, they used an outdated form when filing their report.

But you are right IMHO regarding possible flaws in the process. The system is less than perfect...especially when you are dealing with professional cyclists' lives.

I just don't think that any of these imperfections could have produced the damning evidence spuriously in Landis' case. It really only boiled down to one point...no matter how wide the defence wanted to make it. And this opinion happens to be the same as the adjudicators of the hearing, and most everyone else who studied the evidence (a lot more than I did obviously). And let's not even bring up the obvious attempt to manipulate Lemond's testimony, which wasn't even considered probably in the decision.

__________________

nns1400

Well, if you really knew anything about our "clique", you'd know we don't have group-think. OTOH, if you know anything about our clique at all, then I guess you just lurk jealously in the corner instead of posting anything like a real man.

__________________
This stuff is just crap...Hitchy

Bro Deal

I thought MikeEagle12 and the Order of Men told us that there are no real men anymore.

__________________
"You are like the wind and I like the lion. You form the tempest. The sand stings my eyes and the ground is parched. I roar in defiance but you do not hear. But between us there is a difference. I, like the lion, must remain in my place. While you like the wind will never know yours." -- Mulay Hamid El Raisuli, Lord of the Riff, Sultan to the Berbers, Last of the Barbary Pirates

alienator

Oh? How is a defense supposed to work? According to the lynch mobs, no one can claim innocence, because if they do, they're guilty. So, the Landis team did what any defense team would have done: pointed out the procedural errors and inconsistencies. Of course, since you feel like the sheriff done got his man, those inconsistencies are fine by you. I mean, who cares what happens down the line that's wrong as long as it works for you, now, right?

The BCS analogy is completely wrong. Just because the process found Landis culpable doesn't mean that he was. It doesn't mean that he wasn't either; however, there is no way to be sure since the process was so fucked up.

Proof? Test results? You mean like the ones where ID numbers were recorded incorrectly and then whited out/written over? So you're absolutely positive that's ok, right? Oh sure. That works. As long as the ID for the person you want to hang ends up on the vial, that's ok.

How about that testosterone metabolization, eh? So...clean on day A, dirty on day B, and clean on day C. Hmmmmm.

Here's a little helpful hint for all y'all who gots your guy in yer sights: the procedures are there, allegedly, to prevent these errors. There is a formal procedure so that when things don't run according to procedure, people can point out and say, "uhm, NO!"

I'm fine with my thought, thanks, but if I ever think that I'd need to stoop to asking you for help, I'll keep it in mind. I like how you folks carp about evidence but ignore the problems with the way the evidence was handled. You guys should be on Texas juries. Hang 'em high, but only worry about your mistakes until after it's too late. Nice.

Crankyfeet

I thought when they performed the IRMS test on all his samples taken during the race, they all came out above the 4:1 limit. Not by much (4.4 to about 6.5 or thereabouts)...but the 4:1 limit is supposed to be conservative in any case. Nothing like the 11 or 12:1 ratio found after his Hercules performance. This evidence wasn't used in arbitration because the Stage 17 (?) positive was the only one he was charged with initially.

Were all those vials accidently mixed up with other cyclists using testosterone? Or was it just a conspiracy by the lab and all the lab workers in conjunction with the UCI?

The original tests on the earlier stages weren't IRMS, and didn't trip anything.

And I suppose Lemond was lying when he said that Landis told him by phone that he [Landis] couldn't admit the truth because it would be impossible for him to face his family if he did. I suppose Lemond, under oath, and a confidante who Landis called in distress for advice, would just invent this fact so that Landis' career would be wrecked. What is the motivation for Lemond to lie?? I can see a lot of motivation for Landis to lie about what he said to Lemond. And why would Landis' best friend, Will Geoghan, ring Lemond and threaten him with personal disclosures if he testified? Do you think Lemond would have rung Landis before the threatening calls by Geoghan and said "Look Floyd, I'm going to tell everyone that you told me that you were guilty...I'll make it up so it looks like you and lots of guys are doping...sorry about you losing your TdF title and your name and career being destroyed as a result of my lie under oath"

Yeah...right...

__________________

Bro Deal

I am going to have to go with a conspiracy. The thought that Landis doped is so simple of an explanation it cannot be true. There are dark forces at work here.

__________________
"You are like the wind and I like the lion. You form the tempest. The sand stings my eyes and the ground is parched. I roar in defiance but you do not hear. But between us there is a difference. I, like the lion, must remain in my place. While you like the wind will never know yours." -- Mulay Hamid El Raisuli, Lord of the Riff, Sultan to the Berbers, Last of the Barbary Pirates

threaded

The test results were so bizarre that there is no way a sane person could take them as evidence of anything but the testing process is borked in a deep and meaningful way.

Just my 2c.

__________________
threadeds website, threadeds blog

Bro Deal

You know, the arbs' decision goes a long, long way toward shooting down all the propaganda put out by Landis' spinmeisters.

__________________
"You are like the wind and I like the lion. You form the tempest. The sand stings my eyes and the ground is parched. I roar in defiance but you do not hear. But between us there is a difference. I, like the lion, must remain in my place. While you like the wind will never know yours." -- Mulay Hamid El Raisuli, Lord of the Riff, Sultan to the Berbers, Last of the Barbary Pirates

Crankyfeet

Its a good thing this Landis doping incident, hearing and decision are finally being discussed in a dedicated thread. I don't think it was debated at all the last couple of years.

__________________

nns1400

I thought the evidence was when he won that day...

Here's a tip....when the commentators start using the word "unbelievable!" though they are being enthusiastic and complimentary, just wait it out. That person usually gets busted.

__________________
This stuff is just crap...Hitchy

C'dale Girl

The truth always lies somewhere in the middle . . . . this holds true, even in this thread.

Lest, Alienator, you lump me into some clique (fer real? An internet clique? I take that as a HUGE insult if I'm lumped into that . . . I actually have a real life and, heaven forbid, real friends, but I digress) . . .

Lest you think I'm in some ridiculous internet clique, I hear you Alienator and, heaven forbid, basically agree with you about the procedural issues. Floyd's innocence or guilt is (ready guys, sit down for this one) irrelevant to those procedural issues.

The problem though, Alienator, as I've come to learn anyway, is that die hard cycling fans are too blinded by the doping issues and their emotions to actually step back, remove their emotions and think strictly cognitively, so as to hear those very real procedural issues that you are pointing out. So, you can talk until the cows come home, but believe me when I say that your points will fall on deaf ears.

Criminals go free due to cops messing up procedurally. Yes, it's true, it happens. Simple hypothetical scenario: cops break into a home and find the drug dealer dumping his stash down the toilet. Perfect! They caught him red-handed! Ah, only one problem though. They didn't have a warrant when they busted down the door. Guess what? Barring any other incriminating evidence, the dope dealer just won the freedom lottery, 'cause the drugs seized by the cops were seized illegally by the cops since they had no authority to enter the home to begin with. So that evidence was obtained illegally and cannot be used against him in trial. So, the fact that the cops saw the guy actually handling the drugs becomes . . . . irrelevant . . . . 'cause it's inadmissible evidence . . . and without any other evidence . . . well . . . sadly the drug dealer goes free.

We may not like the outcome, but those procedures and policies are in place for a reason. Because, also sadly (and believe it or not) occasionally somebody does try to set somebody else up, even a (God forbid) "bad" cop. Bad, malicious and/or vindictive people really are out there, as much as you don't want to believe it. So, we let that one drug dealer go free to protect the masses, by instituting and following procedures so as to curtail the inner devil in some person of power that might want to set somebody up that they don't like for some reason.

I know, I hear you . . . how many of those malicious people are out there really? What are the odds of such an event? The Floyd haters are correct. Not that many . . . very low odds. HOWEVER, the reason that is the case is because of (say it with me everyone) those very policies and procedures put into place deter such behavior. Without those policies and procedures, it would be a free for all and the malicious behavior would be in the vast majority, not the minority.

So, here we are, over a year later, with the same pollyanna arguments coming out of the mouths of people on both sides of the argument.

(and yes, my tone and demeanor here is in jest and I'm simply playing in that regard).

Bro Deal

Arguing about whether Landis doped is different than arguing about whether he should be punished. Most doping discussion on the Internet revolves around whether a rider doped. Procedural issues are dismissed because this is not a court of law, and the people crying about cyclist's rights are the same ones who three years ago were denying there was a widespread doping problem or claiming their favorite rider was the victim of a French conspiracy. Their latest defense about rights gets dismissed because it is seen as a cynical attempt to paint dopers as victims and divert the discussion away from whether or not a rider doped.

To continue your hypothetical with the drug dealer, we have one side saying the guy is a dope dealer, the cops caught him red handed; and the other side not saying the dealer should not be punished, but saying he is not a drug dealer at all. Those denying that he is a drug dealer get rightfully laughed at by those pointing at the confiscated drugs.

Whether a riders gets sanctioned is not seen as important to those who have followed pro cyclign for a long time because they know that the sport is thoroughly corrupt with doping. Punishing any individual rider for doping amounts to scapegoating one rider so all the others can continue doing the exact same thing. The punishment itself may be unfair and the system could be improved, but don't try to blow sunshine up our asses by claiming a rider is clean as driven snow.

__________________
"You are like the wind and I like the lion. You form the tempest. The sand stings my eyes and the ground is parched. I roar in defiance but you do not hear. But between us there is a difference. I, like the lion, must remain in my place. While you like the wind will never know yours." -- Mulay Hamid El Raisuli, Lord of the Riff, Sultan to the Berbers, Last of the Barbary Pirates

Crankyfeet

I hear everyone but I still don't think Floyd is a "stud" or a "hottie".

__________________