tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31819641.post3546969434887248641..comments2023-10-06T03:21:26.130-07:00Comments on trust but verify: Strategy on a platterDBrowerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17718913310467614671noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31819641.post-55654550704825142602006-11-24T10:48:00.000-08:002006-11-24T10:48:00.000-08:00ORG,
Let's say Landis has the other data, but can...ORG,<br /><br />Let's say Landis has the other data, but can't use it without official release.<br /><br />Does this tell us anything about the contents? I'm not sure. We can certainly assume they aren't over 4.0, but beyond that, it's just speculation.<br /><br />If it was a bunch of 3.8s, then it would be useful to his defense, I'd think, at least on the TE violation.<br /><br />If it was a bunch of 2.0s, or 1.0s, it would be less help to the defense, because it would argue for a TE violation as alleged -- except for your scenario where they reveal something else that would be of help to Landis.<br /><br />As it stands now, I don't think the TE case can be made without the other results, and all hangs on the CIR. If the CIR looks in danger, then you might think the results will appear as part of bolstering that case if they do bolster the TE case.<br /><br />Or, if the panel orders their production anyway.<br /><br />So I don't know what to make of any of it. I guess to answer your question, I'm a window shopper.<br /><br />TBVDBrowerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17718913310467614671noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31819641.post-44959747683636251802006-11-23T19:23:00.000-08:002006-11-23T19:23:00.000-08:00ORG here ...
TBV:
This thread got me thinking ab...ORG here ...<br /><br />TBV:<br /><br />This thread got me thinking about something. I’ll say it in the form of a statement and let you tell me where you agree and where I'm wrong ....<br /><br />The “best argument” the Landis camp has is the longitudinal data. Landis' camp clandestinely got this data. We know all these tests were negative. However, what it also shows is many of these negative results are similar to the positive test on stage 17. In other words, these negative tests were scientifically no different than the positive test. This would bolster the idea that the positive test has a great deal of subjectivity in it. <br /><br />Or better, maybe one of tests was considered contaminated somewhere between 5.00% and 7.70%. Or maybe, they tossed out a test with a TE ratio of smaller variability. If true, this would destroy any argument USADA could use in defending this positive test.<br /><br />The problem is they cannot use it unless/until they get it through proper channels.<br /><br />I know this is pure conjecture and as such anything I said is possible. Given that, what is your “sense” about what this data holds and why USADA does not want to give it to Landis. In other words, you buying or selling this idea?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31819641.post-30409600911116299062006-11-23T10:43:00.000-08:002006-11-23T10:43:00.000-08:00It seems that Mr. Pound has not merely, as Will st...It seems that Mr. Pound has not merely, as Will states, "exposed his own personal prejudice," he is profiting from it.<br /><br />http://www.amazon.com/Inside-Dope-Biggest-Threat-Sports/dp/0470837330/sr=1-1/qid=1164302069/ref=pd_bbs_1/105-9449640-2513223?ie=UTF8&s=books<br /><br />Prosecuting the winner of the one of the biggest sports events in the world will certainly elevate the stature and sales of the author. Indeed, the inside flap of the book shamelessly exploits his role with WADA: "Pound is the authority in the world on doping in sports." The timing of the release of this book (September 29, 2006) at the height of visibility of the current scandal must have delighted Mr. Pound's agent and publisher. To an objective observer, the coincidence is decidedly suspicious. <br /><br />It may be that all proceeds from this book are being donated to some worthy charity. If so, then Mr. Pound may indeed be motivated by WADA's lofty goals of "health, fairness, and equality." If not, then Mr. Pound has created an intolerable conflict of interest between his role as author and his role as head of WADA. <br /><br />One's mind also boggles to imagine the impartiality and integrity of the institution of WADA tolerating this conflict.Timothyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14249999249069919155noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31819641.post-17593211875663549452006-11-23T07:43:00.000-08:002006-11-23T07:43:00.000-08:00If it's a failure it may be a very dark moment for...If it's a failure it may be a very dark moment for American cycling. If Floyd is guilty he's doing the cycling community a great disservice by declaring marching orders that won't be discarded when the fighting's over. Yes, it's important to strengthen the anti-doping process, but it's also important not to demonize a very worthwhile fight in the fans of this country. That would be selfish and unfortunate.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31819641.post-19333974191927992112006-11-23T07:27:00.000-08:002006-11-23T07:27:00.000-08:00Unfortunately, TbV, it leaves us sort of in the po...Unfortunately, TbV, it leaves us sort of in the position your picture of the strategy platter does: I see carrots, potatoes, and greens on it, but I don't see the promised meat. So with Will's post: the meat is that you don't get to see the meat. Well, it's what makes the puzzle fun. I just hope there is some real meat there. Your comment to the Variability thread (responding to ORG) about the person whose sample was left unrefrigerated for days suggests that the bar for meaty arguments is going to be set very high indeed.<br /><br />MarcAnonymousnoreply@blogger.com