Wednesday Roundup

News
AP report says LNDD is getting money for security, and that Bordry is admitting there is no reason to suspect Landis' involvement in the hacker case. They are also getting WADA funding for more research. Same story at IHT and VeloNews.

CyclingPost reports a Landis attorney just walked by and picked up something related to the case Bordry mentioned when the hacker documents leaked. We're expecting this case to be consolidated into the USADA case when the arbitrators are empaneled.

Landis beats Armstrong, on AOL's list of search counts for sports people this year, coming in 8th and 9th respectively. Some stick and ball guy was #1, and a horse was #2.

Blogs
The thinman at Running Barefoot is concerned that testing is not fair to the athletes it is purported to protect.

The case is emerging at an important time in drug testing for sports. I believe that the majority of the public at large and athletes think the general idea of drug testing to deter and punish cheaters is a necessity. However, the method and quality of enforcement seems to violate the rights of the athletes.

(We also appreciate the plug.)

Zerofilter covers Puerto/Disco, and writes of Landis at the end:

Apparently the strategy against him at this point is draw it out for as long as possible and he'll run out of money. Floyd mentioned in an interview last week that he feels he'll never get a fair trial and will be left with no job, no money, and ton's of legal debt. That's enough to piss off just about anyone who believes in the antiquated idea of innocent until proven guilty. Maybe the UCI should enact some sort of homeland security doctrine and get Rummy to work for them as we already know they agree on things like the judicial process and fair trials.

DerailedUK hears Landis would retire and Disco might be tossed, and concludes:

So Floyd Landis is going away as soon as he's confirmed as an ugly cheating dullard, and everybody hates Discovery Channel! Happy face!

Podium Cafe is saddened by retirement prospect.

PJ mulls the UK interviews, and closes with an aphorism, "it's impossible to save face when you have already lost your head." He doesn't see how the ADAs can back down if they believed him to be innocent.

BikingBis covers the recent stories, with pointer back to TBV.

CaaHoops says who cares about cycling. Ridiculous.

Forums
At DPF, the 6 page LAT thread has gone back to some of the fairness issues. We go over whether anyone would care if Landis wasn't American; what intent has to do with fairness; whether supporting real due process is supporting dopers; "It's a Fair Cop" at the Asian games; and observing that the "trial" in doping cases is the testing, and the "hearing" is about sentencing having already found guilt.

The Beginner Triathlete thread has included this gem:

There have been two truly compelling arguments made in this thread

1. A man is responsible for what ends up in his body

2. If a governmental agency has accused him, he is guilty.

Could an argument be made that would refute either of these notions?

I don't know where to begin... so I'm hands off there.

Snark O' the Day
Get Outdoors blog, in an article about the iBike watt meter, takes some shots at Landis just because: "200 watts is eye-popping coronary time for most people, so you can see that doping is mandatory, or at least until proven innocent."

[end]