The Denver Post interviews Greg LeMond who has more to say about the current state of pro cycling than he did Saturday in his Daily Camera interview. He feels cycling is getting what it deserves and in this interview with John Henderson he specifically talks about the Landis hearings, and his conversation with Floyd Landis:
As in his testimony, LeMond said Friday that he warned Landis before the trial "I told him, 'Floyd, you may think you can get away and hide your lie, but it's always there and it works on you and it works on you,"' LeMond said. "'And in 15-20 years it manifests itself. It's proven throughout psychotherapy and (with) psychologists and psychiatrists that trauma or lying or not being true to yourself has a dramatic effect on self- destructiveness."'LeMond says he is misunderstood and that he is not against Landis at all, but is against the PR campaign to get people to believe in his innocence, LeMond goes further to say however:
"Everybody's entitled to justice," LeMond said. "Everybody's entitled to defend themselves. But the reality is to go out into the public, like the Floyd Fairness Fund, and be asking people who are so gullible and who really don't know what's going on? I don't know how, in a morally conscious way, that he's able to do that
About doping in cycling, LeMond claims everybody's doing it:
"I know what's going on in the sport, and it's despicable," he said. "It's criminal, actually. Organized blood doping. Secret motorcycles. ... Hiding places. Doing human growth hormone, testosterone, cortisone, insulin growth factor, EPO."...and..."It's because everybody's doing it," LeMond said. "They get caught because of a mistake. There are people getting away. The worst ones that are getting away I don't even want to mention
In the earlier interview from this past weekend LeMond had criticized Pat McQuaid and the UCI, McQuaid fires back:
UCI president Pat McQuaid, reached in Dublin, Ireland, on Saturday, angrily answered: "I completely disagree and completely dispute what Greg LeMond says. Greg LeMond himself is not above suspicion. The UCI is doing a good job in the fight against doping. If he talks about accusations of corruption, let him prove it."
LeMond thinks that if Floyd Landis "gets off on a technicality" it would be a big blow to the anti-doping movement, and LeMond's only comment on what may be inadequacies in the system itself is that he believes in the LNDD.
The CyclingNews reports that Andrey Kashechkin will defend himself against out of competition doping violations by claiming the UCI's incompetence:
Kashechkin of Team Astana is fighting against the UCI's regulation of conducting blood and urine samples, and his lawyer added that those "cannot be carried unless one has a mandate from the law. A private organisation like the UCI cannot assume the right to monitor people."
Seems like the wrong argument to make. He got a license with conditions that give the UCI that right (and responsibility). If he wants to complain about how they carry out that mandate, he might have more ground under his feet.
Men's Health website seems to have reposted an old article dating from the 2006 Tour of Georgia, where Landis gives some tips to the writer: Beginning cyclists spin too slowly, for the most part, and standing while climbing isn't always a great idea.
Velonews letters wonder about the delay in publishing a decision in the case, and why no one questions labs when results are negative.
Palatka Daily News talks about restoring Cycling's credibility, and time might be the answer. Lots of time.
An emailer points us at an interesting 5-part series over at Slowtwitch about PED use and enforcement in age-group athletes. What is fair, and what is not? In Part 2, Mark Sisson argues no endurance training is really "healthy" past certain limits. Arnie Baker, in part 3, agrees that what makes one perform best may not make one healthy. He further observes perhaps 20 older members of his cycling club take testosterone supplements for medical reasons, and doesn't know if it's possible to get a TUE for it should they wish to compete in an event where it would be banned. Part 4 considers the general ethics of supplementation, and wonders what business anybody has to tell informed adults they shouldn't do something, for their own good-- like, say, riding down a mountain at 60 mph. And Part 5 wonders about the litigation when some rich triathlete gets popped on a doping charge that affects his professional reputation. No answers, but lots of intriguing discussion.
UltraRob posts another set of pics from the recently contested Leadville 100 with another graphic picture of the "Landis Raspberry". Remember that cycling fandom is about watching other people suffer.
Rant finds himself agreeing in part with Greg LeMond's opinions expressed on Saturday in the Daily Camera on cycling and its current state of affairs -- but not completely.
Jason Macemore notes that Floyd Landis is riding in the Shenandoah Mountain 100.
Tear-it-down rips "Ultimate Frisbee", and puts together a hypothetical team that would kick butt -- including Barry Bonds, Pete Rose, Floyd Landis, Ben Johnson, Tonya Harding, others ... and G.W. Bush.
BikeWorld says we've had 67 working days, and no decision, and thinks the US Supreme Court usually acts more quickly. This doesn't seem correct to us -- a perusal of recent decisions shows 8 published between June 25 and June 28 2007, and they were argued on 18-Apr, 26-Mar, 4-Dec-2006, 17-Apr, 28-Feb, 19-Mar, 25-Apr, and 19-Mar. The one from December is a really long time, and the ones from February and March weren't exactly quick either. I guess "usually" could apply to the 3 from April, but it still seems like an argument from hyperbole.In Brown v. Board of Education, perhaps the most significant decision of the post-war period, the Court invited the parties back to re-argue the case. We probably won't see that happen here, even though Landis/USADA may be the Brown v. BoE of the anti-doping system.