Tuesday, May 22, 2007

Early Tuesday Roundup

Bicycling has " Science of Doping" by Rebecca Bryan which speaks to the testimony yesterday of defense experts who support Floyd Landis' contention that he did not dope, did not test positive for doping, in last year's Tour de France:

Landis claims he is the victim of shoddy work at LNDD, and earlier testimony at this hearing, which began on May 14, has confirmed there were errors in some of the documents produced in conjunction with the case. One of the questions the arbitrators will consider is whether the errors had a bearing on the test result, or whether, in the long run, they are irrelevant

Landis has also maintained that he would not dope during a race in which he knew he would be tested and thus could gain no benefit. Last week this assertion was countered by prosecution witnesses, but in yesterday's testimony Dr. John Amory testified:

On Monday, Doctor John Amory of the University of Washington testified that such small doses might escape the testers but wouldn't have any beneficial effect.

"Based on my review of the literature, testosterone does not have a benefit for recovery," Amory said.

Amory, who treats patients with low testosterone, also said that Landis's test results were too inconsistent to be trustworthy.

Landis will take the stand today for cross examination.

The San Francisco Chronicle posts an updated Eddie Pells (AP) piece on the Landis hearing held yesterday at Pepperdine University Law School. Dr. Wolfram Meier-Augenstein was flown in from his home in Ireland by the Landis team to testify on behalf of the accused 2006 Tour de France Champion. He was confrontational at times during the cross examination by USADA lawyer Richard Young at whom he wagged his finger while making a point, not letting the prosecution attorney get a word in edge wise. Even though he was less animated the next defense witness John Amory was no less convincing. Amory stated that the wild fluctuation in Landis' testosterone-to-epitesosterone profiles during the dates surrounding his positive test didn't seem to make sense:

"The case didn't make a lot of sense to me," Amory said. "Initially when I saw the documents, I thought there were irregularities, first with the handling of the samples, then with the results."

The ratios went from 1.5-to-1 and 1.8-to-1 to 11-to-1, then quickly back below 2-to-1 over the span of 10 days.

"I don't consider those results to be consistent with the use of testosterone gel over that period of time," Amory said.

Landis himself will undergo cross examination today.

The Lompoc Record posts an AP Eddie Pells piece on the high cost of the Landis defense as well as the whole hearing. Yesterday's witness Dr Wolfram Meier-Augenstein's expenses were estimated at more than $20,000. But the defense is not the only entity who is paying high prices for testimony even USADA is paying a great deal of money for some of its testimony, and has hired an outside high priced law firm something not normally done by the anti doping agency:

Last week, when Landis attorneys began cross-examination of witnesses for the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency, the first question they asked each witness was how much money USADA was paying them to be here.
USADA also brought in no fewer than four witnesses from France. A typical airfare from Paris to Los Angeles, with 30 days' notice, was selling for $1,100 on Expedia on Monday night. Those witnesses spent four or five nights in Los Angeles while they testified or waited to testify. One hotel in Santa Monica where a few participants were staying cost $230 a night before tax and parking. Other hotels in the area were even more expensive

Testimony continues this morning with Floyd Landis expected to take the stand for cross examination.

The Californian writes that the Landis defense took aim at the heart of USADA's case yesterday even though the defendant himself did not testify as scheduled:

Instead, two expert defense witnesses, Wolfram Meier-Augenstein and John Amory, took the stand at his U.S. Anti-Doping Agency arbitration hearing at Pepperdine University and countered key parts of the agency's case, attacking its scientific underpinnings.

The San Jose Mercury News' Ann Killion jumps on the "Floyd Landis is Tonya Harding" bandwagon. And in the same paper in a similar though more humorous vein, John Ryan posts what a wild ride the Landis case has been.

Biking Biz posts that yesterday the Landis case turned in the cyclist's favor with the scientific eveidence that was presented by two defense witnesses, Professor Wolfram Meier-Augenstein and John Amory who stated:

"I don't think [Landis's test results] confirm that doping occurred. I can't say there is a physiological process that would give these results. It's quite puzzling to me what exactly is going on here."

Testimony continues this morning with Floyd Landis expected to take the stand for cross examination.

In a story unrelated to the case, VeloNews writes about Michael Rasmussen who broke his hip last fall and had an injury similar to that of Floyd Landis'. Rasmussen fears the bone may become necrotic and he might, as Landis did, need a hip replacement.

The Boulder Report's Joe Lindsey thinks that there are MANY loose ends and unanswered questions that linger, and may linger for a long time after the Landis hearings are through. The most poignant of which is can we believe what Floyd Landis tells us?

Pommi summarizes the morning cross examination of Floyd Landis on Day8 of the hearings.

N.P.A. Think Tank likes cycling and has always liked Floyd Landis. Still it is hard to know what to think with everything that has been revealed by the hearings. On thing is for sure, non-blinded testing is not scientific.

Bike Boy is saddened that the Landis trial is happening, and he has always thought that Floyd did it the right way, clean. But the LeMond testimony really muddied the waters, though Bike Boy has some advice for Mr. Le Mond.

Rant gives us today's warm up for the Landis hearings with a quick review of the good day the defense had yesterday, and a preview of what might be a tough cross examination of Floyd Landis today by USADA. After Landis' cross this morning Dr. Simon Davis, an expert in IRMS instrumentation is expected to testify for the defense. In his first update of the day Rabt takes to task anyone who believe that Floyd Landis is a coward. Floyd is anything but.

The Fanhouse is starting to believe that Floyd Landis is not the only winner of the Tour de France who cheated.

Velogal gives us her favorite quotes from yesterday's session of the Landis hearings.

QuickRelease.TV has an interesting perspective by Robin Williams that may somehow relate to the Floyd Landis case. QuickRelease also has what it considers a funny line from a familiar source.

WhoDigs relates that the scientists who testified yesterday at the Landis hearings backed Floyd up, but win or lose it still may go to the CAS.

Triple Crankset summarizes yesterday's activities in the Landis hearings and previews today's witnesses.

The Sports Frog posts that Floyd Landis is a coward for his alleged involvement with the cell call made to Greg Le Mond last week.

Pedal'n Around read the VeloNews yesterday and thinks that Floyd Landis has had some questionable people around him. Then again after the session yesterday there still may be some hope for Floyd.

Schmicks in Eugene is addicted to the Floyd Landis hearings, and thanks so much for the plug.

Bicycle.net takes another blogger to task for her opinions on the Landis case, and thinks that Landis had been convicted long ago in the court of public opinion. Movies are also provided for our entertainment.


Anonymous said...

Here is an Old But good story that former Pro Cyclist Jason Van Marle wrote for Missingsaddle.com about the whole situation http://www.missingsaddle.com/2006/07/28/jexcuse-in-defense-of-floyd-and-cycling/

Anonymous said...

Trislax here:
TBV has hit the big time. The site got a mention in a byline in the world renowned Trenton Times in refernece to Will's letter of apology! Pulitzer for Blogs? Won't be long now!

Anonymous said...

No this case will close out despite FFF PR efforts.

Why did Floyd Landis choose to wear a black tie the morning after his thug friend Will Geoghegan threatened Greg Lemond? What kind of evil tick was that?

Landis confessed under oath that he was present during the Lemond threat cell call. But rather than tell his attorneys, instead he choose a black tie to frighten Greg?

Do non steroid abusers behave this way?

He better wear a zebra stripe tie today.

Anonymous said...

I think Bicycling would really say "10 ways to Dope Faster" then they'd tell you 20 ways to count to 10.

bobble said...

TBV- there's a minor typo that might be a bit confusing:

"assertion was counted by prosecution witnesses"

/s/counted/countered/ ??

Great work all around!

strbuk said...

Thanks Beebie! I was updating until midnight last night and up again at 5:50AM to start today's Roundup so I KNOW there are some typos,. Keep me honest!!


Anonymous said...

Hi 8:01....Floyd has never been accused of using steroids. Where do you get this stuff?

Also, The sportsfrog story is way off. Wetzel didn't even do any research on his article before publishing it. That wetzel column is just an attempt to draw some attention to him. theroadbike.com has a better point of view on wetzel's column.

Anonymous said...

There's a mention of Landis on a sports blog I'm not sure you cited: http://blog.oregonlive.com/tailgate/2007/05/floyd_landis_and_his_camp_shou.html