Sunday, December 17, 2006

Sunday Roundup

The New York Daily News sports writer Wayne Coffey does an extensive interview with FL at his home in California ....

"On some level (the infamy) will never go away. I think the best result we could hope for here is that the system will change and no one will have to go through this again." Floyd Landis

Coffey does the rounds and picks up some quotes from the other side
a source with in-depth knowledge of WADA's modus operandi and lab protocols disagrees completely with Baker's metabolite interpretation, and doubts the authenticity of his t/e figures. For one thing, Baker's interpretation is based on outdated guidlines, the source says.

"If the numbers are what they say they are, the case wouldn't be going forward. The case is going forward," the source says.

And of course, the ever diplomatic Mr. Pound chips in:
To WADA's Pound, all of these arguments are unpersuasive. "It sounds like Defense 37B to me," he says of the discussion of contamination, and likens the other arguments to a guy who is pulled over for speeding and says, "Officer, why are you stopping me, when there were a whole bunch of people going faster than I was? And the officer says, 'The fact is, you were going over the speed limit.'" Adds Pound, "He has to find some way to overcome the fact that there is an A and B sample that is up to its eyeballs in testosterone."

CyclingNews covers the UK interview.

Neil@road has some pix from SD with Landis on the track's derny bike.

Clickz, an advertising blog, talks about trust and how interactive media changes the game, citing Landis' document release.

Florida Maschist quotes AP story and tells Landis to "give it up."

Trav says,
Do I need to feel sorry for Floyd Landis, the American cyclist who won the Tour de France last July but who immediately tested positive for elevated levels of testosterone, suggesting the illegal use of performance enhancing substances? He claims he'll be exhonerated. He claims the tests were wrong and there is a legitimate explanation. He claims the scandal caused the death of his father-in-law. He claims his career is over because of the wrongful accusations. So I wonder, do I need to feel sorry for him? He appears to have cheated and he got caught. Life is like that sometimes.

And HL Mencken wrote, "For every complex problem there is a solution that is simple, neat and wrong". Life is like that too.

Rant catches the drift of our Mencken quote above, and reviews Coffey's Daily News story.

At DPF, Ciclisto went the the Witt Memorial, and came away convinced The King is Back.

Also at DPF, VDB retranslates the Dutch interview and gets a very different reading than we've heard echoed back in the reports the last two days,
Ok, so I got the time to read the article a little bit better, and Floyd doesn't say that he won't be back. What he does say, however, is that he fears he might not get the chance to become a rider again. And that next season will very likely be a lost cause too, because even though he technically speaking isn't suspended yet, no team will want to sign him right now. Here's my translation of the text:

Landis: "I'm taking up this challenge [fighting the institutions] with the same willpower that made me the best rider in the world. I don't know if I'll ever be a professional rider again. Chances are slim that you'll see me on a bike in 2007, but all that doesn't matter at the moment. What they did to me is just unacceptable. I know they'll keep fighting me until I'm all out of money. Who cares? Money comes and goes. I'm not above getting an everyday job. But if I win this, every rider after me will benefit from it too. That's what keeps me going."

And the last few sentences of the interview:

Landis: "Cycling is just a way of clearing my head at the moment. I ride with the same enthusiasm as a 15-year old, but not really with the idea of becoming a rider again in the near future. Becoming the best rider in the world again is for later. That is, if I get the chance."

The first quote might actually make sense in light of the money-discussion in this thread too. wink.gif And just for fun, Floyd on de Peet (they were on Mercury together)

Landis: "A hell of a rider, even though he was only interested in Het Volk, the Ronde van Vlaanderen and Paris-Roubaix. And he could drink like you wouldn't believe! (grins) A great guy who taught me a lot about Belgian beers. Leffe is my favorite, hands down."

Hey Floyd, care to back up those statements about Van Petegem? laugh.gif It sure sounds like him, but I never did share a beer (or two, or five) with him. Actually pretty funny remark keeping the recent Van Huffel - Peiper spat about beer in mind. happy.gif



Anonymous said...

ORG Here ....

A passage from teh daily news article .....

Baker, who also maintains that he has seen reports from two unrelated tests done by the UCLA Olympic Laboratory showing that samples in which a single metabolite was present were deemed negative. To Baker, the upshot is clear: if Landis' work had been done at UCLA, he would've been in the clear.


This is new to me, but is it new to the public? If it is new, is this the "best argument" the Landis camp has been holding back? That is, documentation of other tests that were negative that look identical to Floyds?

Theresa said...

God, I want Floyd to race again...I know this is a stretch, but could the new congress put pressure on the USADA to schedule his hearing as soon as possible? Or, am I just dreaming...

Anonymous said...

From the story above again ...

a source with in-depth knowledge of WADA's modus operandi and lab protocols disagrees completely with Baker's metabolite interpretation, and doubts the authenticity of his t/e figures.


Forgive me for being literal, they are not Baker's figures. He did not create the numbers, the Paris lab did. He could mis-read them, he could mis-intepret them, but he did not create them. Am I missing something????

Further, a "source with in-depth knowledge of WADA's modus operandi" sounds like someone who is not currently with WADA, just who understands how they work. In other words, someone that doeesn't know what WADA is going to argue.

Anonymous said...

Pound is wrong. As far as being "up to his eyeballs in testosterone," USADA0101 shows Landis's level at 45.4 ng/mL. Clearly NOT a high amount.

Anonymous said...

Of course Pound is wrong. That is like saying the sky is blue.

Anonymous said...

Pound is wrong. As far as being "up to his eyeballs in testosterone," USADA0101 shows Landis's level at 45.4 ng/mL. Clearly NOT a high amount

He's not wrong, he's a liar. Tammy Thomas is threatened with 15 years in jail for (allegedly) lying. What's Pound going to get?

Anonymous said...

ORG here ....

I can understand Landis' despair right now. He's in purgatory. When he get's an arbitration date he will have a goal to work for and I'll bet his spirits will pick up (as well as his aniexty). This is why I discount anything he says now about his future.

And when he gets a ruling, everything will change. If he loses, he retires and moves on. But, if he is acquitted, he is the lead story in every paper in the world the next day. He is flooded with media request for interviews. His status instantly changes. And so will his outlook.

So, to ask a question I've been asking for a month, when is a date going to be agreed upon? Why the dealy in setting a date? I was understanding that the date was going to be agreed upon before Thanksgiving. If its not announced in the next few days, then I would think we'll hear nothing until well after the holidays.

So, when are we getting a date? Why the delay? Are they negotiation behind the scences?