Friday, March 21, 2008

Quotes from the Past Part IV

From a 2003 interview of Hein Verbruggen, at The Daily Peloton by Janna Trevisanut


The UCI submitted a nearly 80 page annotated document to WADA, proposing code language and including 30 pages of practical and philosophic comments. Among these UCI comments are a few very significant disagreements with the wording and/or spirit of the Anti-Doping Code, specifically on ensuring that the code is evenly enforced across all sporting disciplines, redundancy of testing (harmonization), and the sanctions for athletes who test positive in a doping test (called a "control"). The Daily Peloton contacted UCI President Mr. Hein Verbruggen for his comments on these and other points.

[...]

"This code is written by mainly by USADA people [the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency], by Mr. Richard Young, and this code is made extremely detailed, extremely detailed – it is done as you do it in America. In America, if you arrest somebody, for instance, you have to say, ‘These are your rights, you’re entitled to have your lawyer, this is the Constitution.’" [Mr. Young is a member of the WADA Anti-Doping Code Project Team]

[...]

I am not against sanctions. I’m surely not. But these sanctions are unfair for our athletes. It is because they made a mistake, but the WADA have put in two years minimum [as a sanction]. And the two years minimum – I’m not against a minimum, but if you take a minimum sanction of two years, that sanction, for certain sports, means not only a minimum, it’s immediately a maximum because the athlete can’t make it back to the sport.

[...]

"And at the same time, if there is a shooter, a shooter doesn’t lose a job because it’s not a professional sport. He can continue to practice. If he’s been found positive, he’s out for two years, he can continue to practice – he might even be a police agent who practices shooting anyhow – and after two years he can take up his sport again and become a world champion again. He hasn’t lost any income. And he can continue because he has a sports career of thirty years, perhaps. Whereas a cyclist, he has a sports career of ten years. If you give him two years, if ever he can make it back, and that’s questionable, it’s 20% of his sporting career."

[...]

In Athens we have two athletes that test positive, an American professional cyclist, and an American professional basketball player. The American cyclist is two years out of his job - in the same games – he is positive, two years out of his job. And the American basketball player just goes home and continues to play.

[...]

"I haven’t received any answer from WADA. But I’m very curious, because Mr. Richard Young, who wrote the code – as a matter of fact I discussed it with him – this was no surprise [to him]. I discussed it with him. I said, ‘Richard, are you really, really proposing that kind of discrimination between an American cyclist and an American basketball player?’ And he looked at me and he said, ‘Ah well, yeah, that’s the consequences.’ And I said, ‘Then you’re going to have a letter from me,’ and he said, ‘I can understand.’ This is what has happened."

[...]

Until now, it often is the case that when I talk with colleagues from other federations, I have had comments like, ‘Jesus, Hein, you have serious problems with this doping,’ and I would say to them, ‘What about you?’

"And they would say, ‘Well, fortunately we don’t have the problem.’ And then I would say, ‘Do you control?’ And they would say, ‘We don’t control because we don’t have the problem.’

[...]

If cycling has a doping problem, it also has an anti-doping policy. And this was set already, six, seven, eight years ago. And the thing is, if you test, you find. If you don’t test, you don’t find. And this is not something I’m just saying – many people have said, ‘At least they test in cycling,’ and also the riders want to test, you know; so this is positive.

[...]

However, the UCI made its first appeal to governments to face the challenge of doping in sport, not in the 90’s, not in the 80’s, but in 1967 in the Le Monde Cicliste cycling journal. And they have not stopped since. So regardless of your own opinion about doping in this sport, it is clear that pro cycling will continue to be at the forefront of the fight.

A comprehensive history of the UCI’s forty years of anti-doping activities can be found in Acrobat format here.


We remind readers the UCI and Verbruggen are reported to be suing Mr. Pound in 2008 over claims that Pound has defamed the historical anti-doping efforts of the UCI.

Full Post with Comments...

In Praise of Richard Young

In a comment over at Rant, Bill Hue wrote:

USADA got the consummate insider when it hired Richard Young. Whether he serves on an athlete disciplinary Panel (He is a WADA designee on Arbitration Panels), represents USADA or jets to conferences on behalf of the US Olympic Committee, he swings with the movers and shakers in the Olympic Movement.

Young is often mentioned as the father of the WADA Code and is a friend of Dicks Pound and McLaren. It was no coincidence that he ran circles around Patrice Brunet, literally testified as to lab procedures himself during leading direct examination and successfully convinced two other insiders, McLaren and Brunet, what the WADA Code did NOT require (discovery, chain of custody, duplication of test results, retaining of records and any standard other than “It looks like it” in chromatography, just as examples) in the first Landis Appeal.

Travis Tygart knows that is the best “his” money can buy. It is no surprise that there is then little money left to “celebrate” clean athletes. However, maybe we can all chip in a few more dollars to our taxes buy clean athletes a little plaque or a Happy Meal at McD’s. We could do that because if you listen to some people, there are not all that many clean athletes to “celebrate”.

Full Post with Comments...

Friday Roundup

Still no news from the CAS hearing of Floyd Landis which enters day three in New York City. The hearing is scheduled to end Monday with a day off on Sunday for Easter. The silence is maddening, stay tuned.


News
ESPN posts a Bonnie Ford piece on cycling's "selection Thursday" as the ASO send out its invitations to their version of "the big dance". A majority of the article concerns Slipstream's reaction to the invite, wonder if "bracket madness" can be applied to the Tour de France?

In another story from ESPN the AP reports that though systematic doping has been determined to have been present during the 2006 season on T-Mobile, there is thus far no evidence that Jan Ullrich partook, though suspicions still run high that he did.

The CyclingNews quotes TdF director Christian Prudhomme as saying the exclusion of Astana from the Tour this year was aimed at the team and not defending champ Alberto Contador, this is likely of no comfort to Contador:

The ASO has given Astana's past doping offenses as a reason for excluding the team from this year's event, but the team's spokesman Philippe Maertens decried the hypocrisy of the decision. "Where is the logic? There are other teams who have doping records. Rabobank and Cofidis were faulted in last year's Tour," he said.

In other CyclingNews it's rumored that former Landis Phonak teammate Axel Merckx may be named manager of troubled Rock Racing. And Danilo DiLuca is impatient to have his CAS decision announced next week as he has suffered enough.

The CyclingNews mailbag is full of discussion about Astana, the UCI, the ASO, Cadel Evans, and the Kevin Van Impe story.

In the world of real law, the SF Chronicle reports the Barry Bonds case is being pushed back until at least June for the prosecutors to fix the deficient indictment.

Blogs
Racejunkie takes a turn around the latest news in cycling from the past few days, including some comment on the former T-Mobile's medical staff, and the fact that to no one's surprise Astana has been left out of the TdF.

Rant writes about irony today: the irony, or is it really an early April Fools, of Dick Pound being sued by the UCI, and the irony of silence from a Landis hearing. As to paying for the Landis/CAS hearing Rant has a few comments as well.

Tour Squad wishes Floyd Landis lots of luck in his CAS hearings this week in NYC, and thinks Floyd should sue the pants off of anyone who accused him wrongly afterwards, IF he wins of course.

German blog American Arena, machine translated, has a skeptical view of the Landis appeal and a positive view of Dugard's enlightenment.

CFA is in an extra snarky mood as he speculates on Floyd Landis, his friends, and their relationship to Rock Racing.

Full Post with Comments...

Thursday, March 20, 2008

Video from the Appeal

This just in, from a link provided by Gary O' Brien:



The first witness is sworn in.


Full Post with Comments...

Where to Begin

In a pot-meeting-kettle moment, or an early April Fool's prank, we learn courtesy VeloNews that the UCI is suing Mr. Pound for defamation about its anti-doping efforts.

The case is in Switzerland, which we presume has more plaintiff-friendly defamation laws than the United States, where this wouldn't pass the laugh test.

"I don't make the news, I only report it." - Jean Shepherd, frequently.

Full Post with Comments...

Quotes from the Past, Part III

USADA was formed on behalf of clean athletes to ensure fair play and the integrity of the rules, plain and simple. No case is worth compromising the rules and impugning our integrity and credibility. When USADA is under its legal budget as it was in 2006, the money is allocated to research and education. We would much rather spend money on research and education than fighting over whether a person has committed a doping offense.

[...]

What is frustrating from our end is when athletes who know they have been doping waste USADA’s resources looking to escape accountability.

[...]

The bottom line is that when bringing a case, USADA’s sole objective is absolutely a search for the truth. No athlete who has not engaged in doping behavior has any reason to fear or otherwise attempt to avoid the USADA process.

[...]

First, every athlete accused of a doping violation is innocent until proven guilty. The ADA has the burden to prove the athlete is guilty. Also, every accused athlete has the opportunity to have the facts of their case examined and may receive a reduction in their sanction if exceptional circumstances exist. The system as currently constructed strikes the balance of protecting athletes from truly exceptional circumstances without compromising the integrity of the system by allowing an athlete to simply blame someone else for the substance in their body.



USADA general counsel Travis Tygart said he is barred under confidentiality rules from discussing any specifics of the Landis case, but added, "We're ready to proceed. We want hearings done as soon as possible."


Travis Tygart, January 2007,

before USADA decided it wanted to test all of Landis' other B samples from the 2006 Tour de France,. This was finally completed, at no small expense to all parties, in April 2007, just weeks before the May hearing.



Full Post with Comments...

Quotes from the Past, Part II

Because cycling is an Olympic sport, while the Olympics does very little for cycling, we are subject to WADA. The problem comes from the fact that mutually, cycling and the Olympics do very little for each other. Therefore it is the perfect whipping boy for Dick Pound who makes it clear that he cares very little about the reputation of the sport and because it is big enough to get publicity but not wealthy enough to make him go away, he makes it one of a few which he would destroy for his agenda. Furthermore to that end, he and WADA have no financial interest in the sport progressing, so why be reasonable, since the more positive tests they can produce (at any cost) the more credibility they gain. The sport needs to leave the Olympics if it will ever become self governed and make wise business decisions from every aspect, not doping alone.


Full Post with Comments...

Thursday Roundup

It's quiet this morning, no news from yesterday's opening session of the Floyd Landis CAS hearing in New York City. Our pre-hearing Q&A can be found here.


News
The VeloNews reports the UCI has filed a law suit against former WADA president Dick Pound for making remarks about its. anti-doping program that were"injurious and biased". Mr. Pound was uncharacteristically unavailable for comment.

In more VeloNews the CAS has promised that the Danilo DiLuca ruling will be announced in 10 days time. Would that the Landis ruling could be so timely.

ESPN publishes the list of team the ASO has invited to the Tour de France this year and as was expected Astana is not among them, though two American teams were invited. Rabobank and High Road (formerly T-Mobile, see story below) were included. Considering their checkered pasts, the motives of the ASO again come into question. Here is the list of teams:

Agritubel (Fra), Slipstream Chipotle - H30 (USA) and Barloworld (GBr). The ProTour teams are Gerolsteiner and Team Milram (Ger), Quick Step and Silence-Lotto (Bel), Team CSC (Den), Caisse d'Epargne, Euskaltel-Euskadi and Saunier-Duval-Scott (Spa), High Road (USA), Bouygues Telecom, Crédit Agricole, Cofidis, Française des Jeux and AG2R La Mondiale (Fra), Lampre and Liquigas (Ita), Rabobank (Ned).

The CyclingNews reports this morning that two more former T-Mobile team doctors have been implicated in systematic team doping practices during the 2006 season:

The investigation commission of the Freiburg University Clinic has released first conclusions of its inquiry into the doping practices of its doctors regarding the T-Mobile team. In addition to the former team doctors Andreas Schmid and Lothar Heinrich, the commission concluded that also Andreas Blum and Stefan Vogt had been involved in the doping treatments of T-Mobile riders during the 2006 season.

Blum and Vogt reportedly received payments in relation to illegal doping practices. The commission was created to "reveal the methods used by the cycling team to additionally remunerate team doctors, without the knowledge of the University Clinic." It also concluded that blood doping took place in the immediate surroundings of the Clinic, and that further performance-enhancing methods had been applied to pro cyclists between 2001 and 2005, even if former T-Mobile pro Patrik Sinkewitz did not give any names for this assumption.


The VeloNews Mailbag has a few letters about the ASO/UCI controversy, but is much more varied in subject coverage than in previous weeks.

Blogs
The Steroid Report notes the beginning of the Landis/CAS hearing yesterday and cites one of our favorite bloggers in his discussion. Thanks for the blurb.

Steroid Nation likens Landis to General Custer, and wags a finger at the cost to the poor suffering taxpayers.


WADAwatch, in lengthy but important reading, can't find a part of the WADA code that lets WADA foot the bill for USADA, and says CAS has the ball:

The Court of Arbitration for Sport has an ordained power, at this moment, to slap down the callous presumptions and presumptuousness of WADA, and provide the Athletic world, through this single, system-rocking Landis case, the maximum amount of 'judicial interpretation' WADA 'thought' it wanted.

Article 3.2.1 (burden on Athlete; departure);
Article 6.4 (lab conformity with ISL, etc.);
Article 7.1 and 7.2 (burden on ADO; 'ensurance of zero departures');
AND: the International Standard for Laboratories...

There is also this observant sidebar:

Floyd's case forces upon him the legal burden to prove that 'departure from the International Standard occurred which could reasonably have caused the Adverse Analytical Finding' (Art. 3.2.1), if evidence exists of laboratory failure to follow ISL requirements. This is another major clause that has been 'screwed tight' by the WADA redrafting exercise.

Yet there exists the prior burden, ignored in most analyses of the Landis case, which places on an ADO or Signatory 'with results management responsibilities', the preliminary burden to ensure that there was no departure (See Art. 7.1 and 7.2, as mentioned above).

The importance of this cannot be minimized, because it puts ADOs forward, whose neutrality should (HA!) be as unassailable as that of WADA, as the first line of protection of an Athlete's rights.

The opposite legal effect is in practice; in the Landis case, USADA should have signalled 'ISL' departures to the LNDD lab in France, and to WADA: in reality, USADA hid those, and fought to suppress such evidence from being admitted.


WADA Watch goes on to say there is another trial going on in NY, that of Richard Young, who has had his fingers in a great many things, and makes clear how large the stakes are.

Full Post with Comments...

Wednesday, March 19, 2008

Quotes from the past, Part I.


I received a call from Pat McQuaid, with whom I had never previously spoken on the phone, during which I was told that I should save my money and go home because it will be impossible for me to win. I told him that I had not done it and had to defend myself, to which he said; "Floyd, I think you're not a bad guy and I think you're an honest guy who made an honest mistake. And I am not saying that you did something that everyone else wasn't doing, I'm just saying that you got caught".

Landis, 6-Oct-2006, relating conversations from August, 2006, before we settled on doing round ups.

Full Post with Comments...

Wednesday Roundup

Landis' CAS hearing begins in the New York City law offices of Debevoise & Plimpton, behind closed doors. Information about who will appear to testify, and how long exactly it will last, has been scarce. We have heard both five and six day durations, and it is unknown whether there will be a weekend session and or any break for Easter. Our Q&A can be found here. Don't expect much news to come out any time soon.


News
ESPN's Bonnie D. Ford writes an excellent preview of the CAS hearing which began today in New York City. She outlines the case and profiles the participants. Some interesting tidbits: no gag order has been placed, but both sides are being tight lipped as to testimony and witnesses, Easter Sunday will be a day off (this implies that there will be a Saturday session), USADA will once again be represented by Mathew Barnett and Richard Young, Landis will be represented by Maurice Suh with no mention of Howard Jacobs who was part of the team in May at the initial USADA hearing. One last thing, the CAS ruling may take from weeks to months to be announced.

Legal groupies will be thrilled to learn that Matt Barnett has gone (nearly) solo, starting his own practice with Vanessa, forming Barnett and Barnett PC. Ford says she's Mrs. B; we'd earlier guessed sister, oops. No CV is online. He's an NYU Law and Dartmouth man. It's a small firm, but there are those who love it.

The NY Times previews the Landis CAS hearing which begins today in New York City. The proceedings are not open to the public, as was last May's Landis/USADA hearings, and may contain new evidence and witness testimony:

Unlike an appeal before a criminal court, which must focus on points of law and procedure, this hearing will allow lawyers for Landis to present new or additional evidence. The appeal is being conducted by the Court of Arbitration for Sport, the final stage of appeal for doping cases.“It’s like a completely new trial,” said Katy Hogg, a spokeswoman for the court, which is based in Lausanne, Switzerland.

Exactly what Landis’s legal team will present to the three-member panel is unknown. A spokeswoman for Landis and his lawyer, Maurice Suh, said that neither was available for interviews.

The CyclingNews also mentions the beginning of Floyd Landis' case before the CAS today, as well as WADA's disappointment in the UCI who has refused to step up and pay some of the expenses. This is particularly strange in light of the fact that the case is being held under UCI rules, perhaps the UCI has strained its coffers in the recent fight with the ASO.

In a special news feature the CyclingNews says Eric Boyer , president of AIGCP, might be the one most in the UCI's cross hairs over the UCI ASO battle for pro cycling control.

The Boulder Report talks about the Mario Cipollini/Rock Racing "break up" , and in the discussion Lindsey revisits the controversy that had Paul Scott leaving A.C.E. Lindsey asks if any of this really matters, and gives his own response, who knows.

Blogs
Monetize This provides a gratuitous snark that frankly seems to be just the kind of thing posted merely to get hits. He reports it worked. Glad to help. "We'll always have Paris."

WADAwatch begins with the intriguing title,"WADA trial, de novo with a twist: WADA sandbags Landis" and in his own inimitable way he summarizes what we will ultimately see in a few weeks time:

On trial today, is a defendant, yet an entire system is also at risk. When the decision falls, we will voraciously read the logic of a reversal*, in which Floyd is exonerated due to 'errors of procedure', or 'incapability of staff in a lab to follow clear rules, and use precision tools' (up to more than 500 thousand Swiss francs, or similarly in dollars).

OR, we will read an affirmation* that the substantive evidence, in spite of the known, acknowledged, and minimized errors found therein, are still sufficient proof of a digression from purity in sport.



WADAWatch is also not impressed by WADA's now financial investment in the prosecution, thinking it calls into question neutrality, objectivity, and commitment to justice. We think it is magnanimous to suggest WADA was ever interested in those things.

Gene Bisbee writes about the start of Floyd Landis' CAS hearing which began today. Gene then posts a summary of the Landis case contained in ten points from the past 20 months. It just goes to show how one can change one's mind, many times.

Chris @Podium Cafe says he hasn't the heart to cover this Landis hearing, he'll let us do the scrounge work of digging up any details we can. Thanks for the confidence.

Kurier.at has a piece with a picture of Landis that we haven't translated, but the headline got our attention: "Dumm und dümmer". We think they aren't talking about Armstrong's phrase for the pair of Landis and Zabriskie.


Indiana Daily Student
posts an opinion by a runner who is tired of cyclists training for the Little 500 blowing by him and not sharing the road nicely:
[R]ight when I hit perfect stride, some Floyd Landis comes up next to me, signals his next move and totally throws me off the road while jetting by in his Schwinn.


"Share the road" works more than one way, fellow bikers.

Forums
Cutting Edge Muscle has a thread of dubious veracity and fascinating detail about how some people think doping in cycling has worked. The "scoop" here is that Landis was doing T and Epi-T, that he owed his blood doping doctor money so the Doc messed him up. And people accuse us of conspiracy theories.

Full Post with Comments...

Tuesday, March 18, 2008

Eve of the Appeal Q and A

Q: You've been on this forever, and I can't make heads or tails. What gives?

All of our appeal specific coverage can be found here, which will identify many of the issues that will be discussed. We hope. Alternately, we have a bunch of gas-bag articles talking about legal aspects and scientific issues.

For a general rundown, we refer to Bill Hue's CAS Overview from October.

Q: Who are the parties?

Landis and USADA. Landis is being represented by Maurice Suh, and we don't know if Howard Jacobs is going to be directly involved. USADA is being represented by, we think, the same Holmes-Roberts-Owen group of Richard Young, Dan Dunn, and Matt Barnett, plus others.

Q: Is this an appeal or a new hearing?

Both. It's an appeal procedurally, but is de novo, which means the Panel can evaluate everything from scratch without being held to any findings of fact by the previous panel, and the parties are free to bring in new evidence and arguments.

In an "appeal" as most folks think about it, the parties only get to argue about mistakes in legal interpretation made by the panel of first instance, and not about the facts at all. They don't get to bring in any new evidence, or change the basic arguments made initially.

Not so limited here. If someone wants to bring in the Nazi Frogmen, or argue the blood-test results prove something, it would be allowed. If new arguments are inconsistent with those made earlier, there might be some explaining to do about why the previous claims are now inoperative, but you get to do it.

Q: Who are the arbiters?

We ran over this in November. The chair was selected by CAS, not the parties, and is David Williams QC from New Zealand. The USADA pick is David Rivkin, and the hearing will be held at his firm's offices in NYC. The Landis pick is Jan Paulsson, who was the chair of the Landaluce panel.

Q: Who is paying?

We don't know where Landis is getting his money, and this looks to be a low-budget expedition for him. Eddie Pells says that WADA is picking up most if not all of USADA's costs, and that WADA is not happy that the UCI is not chipping in.

CAS is apparently paying for the Arbs.

At the first hearing in Malibu, the Panel and facilities were paid for by the USOC, who is now out of the loop.

Bean counters or taxpayer rights advocates might wonder why USADA uses outside counsel instead of doing things in-house. USADA may be happier with the end-result compared to what might happen with in-house legal staff, but it has got to be a budget-busting practice. If USADA were less concerned about winning! then they could use less costly in-house prosecution, like a district attorney does. It's a rare prosecution (i.e., Boies in US v. Microsoft, also this.) where outside litigators are brought in by the charging side.

Q: Where is it being held?

The NY Offices of Baker Hostetler, on the 11th floor of 45 Rockefeller Plaza; [oops wrong David Rivkin!] NY Offices of Debevoise & Plimpton, 919 Third Ave, according to the CAS press release. Suh's Gibson-Dunn is at 200 Park Avenue, 11 short and 2 long blocks away. HRO doesn't have a NY office.

If USADA/HRO has been set up in the Debevoise & Plimpton offices in the run-up, one might raise an eyebrow, but it is probably reasonably expedient.

Q: What idiots scheduled it over Easter weekend in New York?

Not us! (We're not going.)

Q: Who is testifying?

Nobody is saying, publicly, yet. We expect most direct testimony to be done by declarations and/or affidavits, with cross examination during the hearing. Whether witnesses will be in NY is unclear; we expect many will be done via phone-call. Doing direct by declaration is fast, but cross-by-phone isn't.

Q: What is the scuttlebutt?

Very tight lipped. Suh is professing optimism according to Pells, but then again, he would. USADA has been following equally predictable posturing. That's why they hold the hearing.

Q: What are the changes in the case?

We don't expect too many Papp/LeMond like issues to be discussed. It'll probably be the dry science and procedure, the kind of stuff we've been discussing here. Probably also more chain of custody technicalities as well.

The main new issue is the "different columns" discovery, and how USADA will attempt to rebut it. USADA seems to face a dilemma with that one:

They can either admit the columns were different, and deal with scientific fallout; or claim they were the same columns and the documentation is "in error", but that "error" has nothing to do with the reported results.

The latter seems to say, "We can lie in the document packages and our other filings as much as we like with no consequences, as long as we claim it doesn't affect the test result. And it is too late, expensive, and otherwise impossible to find out the truth by the time these things are noticed, so we win by having lied. That's the WADA code in action. We know, we wrote it to be that way."

And,"Crikey!", USADA might be right about that, if the Panel accepts it as the way the rules should work.

Q: Where is the video feed?

Um, sorry, not this time.

With luck, we hope to eventually get the transcripts and the rulings. If Landis holds good on his "openness" pledge, we'll have plenty to catalog and archive later.

Q: Is there a confidentiality/gag order in place?

We don't know.


Full Post with Comments...

Tuesday Roundup

News
AP/Eddie Pells flushed some more information out on the financing of the USADA prosecution of Landis at the hearing that starts tomorrow. Turns out WADA is footing most of the bill for USADA's outside attorneys, and the agency is irked the UCI hasn't offered to pony up. The UCI says it is USADA's responsibility. We say: Third base. Everybody is being tight lipped about who the witnesses (if any) are going to be. Don't expect much breaking news.

The AFP previews Floyd Landis' CAS hearing which commences behind closed doors tomorrow at the office's of arbiter Rivkin's law firm in Manhattan. The hearing is expected to last 5-6 days and the announcement of the panel's decision will be made from Lausanne.

The VeloNews
reports the UCI has scheduled meetings with rider reps and teams concerning the recent dispute with the ASO , and will also commence disciplinary hearings with the French cycling federation over its role in the divide between the agencies .

The CyclingNews says that the "on again off again" relationship between Rock Racing and Mario Cipollini seems to be OFF, apparently for good this time.

In earlier CyclingNews reported late yesterday, AIGCP has allegedly entered into an agreement with the ASO, thus cutting out completely any authority of the UCI. The agreement concerned team invitations to the Tour de France, and other ASO cycling events, which will be staged under the auspices of the French cycling federation, as was Paris-Nice:


Now, a new chapter in the conflict will be opened, as the teams will negotiate race participation conditions not only for the next event organized by ASO - which would be Paris-Roubaix - but for all of the competitions owned by the organizer. "ASO will announce the team invitations to its races in one week approximately," (AIGCP president Eric) Boyer explained. "Then, we will sign participation contracts for the whole season."

The head of the UCI, Pat McQuaid, had suspended contacts with the AIGCP last week. Still, Boyer insisted that "it's them who cut ties with us, not vice versa. I'm still open to discuss with McQuaid. He just has to understand that our interest is to race, and that we cannot boycott an organizer who owns the most important race on the calendar."

NPR's Talk of the Nation hosted a piece yesterday about PED's and academics, everyone's getting into the act. A link to the podcast can be found with the article.

The AP has a story likely to be widely misread, about a positive in Billiards by German national champion Axel Buescher, for an EPO masking agent. What masking agent is not exactly made clear; as we've learned, the devil is in the details. To be clear, the dude did not test positive for EPO per se, and the "masking agent" might be something as innocuous as Zack Lund's finestride.

Finally, ESPN/Mark (Game of Shadows) Fainaru-Wada has a long piece about Marion Jones going to jail, outlineing her aggressive defense (which no doubt colors US and likening it to what Clemens has done. It also compares the aggessive defense to Kelli White, who confessed and moved on. (Betsy Andreu says we should just substitute a lot of other names for Jones and see if it rings any bells.)

The underlying, unasked questions are whether there is ever anyone falsely accused, and what the appropriate defense would be for such a person.

Blogs
Rant pens a "fictional" tale of two cyclists that has an eerily familiar scenario.

The Boulder Report notes the set is being struck for the Ball and Cipo show, announced with a two line press release, and no availability for interviews. Well, that was fun. Lindsey goes over some of the fallout.

Hmm, we had Basso for one ToC in Disco livery, now Cipo for one in Rock. Next year, maybe we'll get Lance back in Astana for a one-0ff. They still ride Treks.

Racejunkie posts a few juicy tidbits this morning, including an interesting rumor or two, and also gives us a nice blurb. Thanks RJ.

The Steroid Report notes recent biases in the press that seem to go against Floyd Landis. SR has been reading about Landis in some old familiar places, and feels that no taxpayer money should be spent on regulating any sport.

Fatty got lots of well deserved GOOD news yesterday!

Velo Vortmax
thinks sniveling disgruntled US taxpayers, who have footed USADA's bill in the Landis case, should seek relief from the AFLD:

If USADA and the taxpayers are burdened with expensive litigation to defend the poor lab performance of LNDD then WADA should encourage the laboratories to train their personnel on how to run the tests, how to set up the equipment, how to code the data on the Lab Document Package, how to make corrections correctly, and how to maintain a credible chain of custody. Then these expensive and prolonged appeals would be prevented saving everyone money. U.S. taxpayer and athlete. Until WADA makes a valiant attempt to correct the existing problems appeals will continue since the laboratory results can not be relied upon to prove the Adverse Analytical Finding

AFLD really needs a new accreditation contractor at this point since COFRAC seems incapable of meeting even the minimal audit standards required for an WADA/IOC laboratory. COFRAC accreditation audit 1 1174 was used to validate the Landis LNDD "B" IRMS tests done at LNDD in order to validate the AFLD suspension; in spite of obvious lab errors. For example, the IRMS operating guide was missing, the IRMS tubing was set up incorrectly. Frelat injected the "B" sample calibration mix into the IRMS five hours before the Carbon Isotope Ratio (CIR) was run. Between the injection of the calibration mix and the CIR the IRMS was left unattended, an obvious violation of the chain-of-custody requirement. Landis' "B" sample was degraded. Other violations are documented in the Lab Document Package and by witness testimony.

Cycledog digs his fangs into the bad headline that has been used on Pell's piece on the cost of the Landis case. He may want to avoid mistaking the headline writer for the author of the body.

The FredCast
runs with the news that WADA is picking up USADA's bill on the Landis appeal, and has little sympathy for the whining by the agencies about the cost:

Personally, I don’t see why anyone is upset that USADA, WADA, or any other alphabet soup group has to foot the bill for this case. Part of the reason they exist is not only to test athletes, but also to adjudicate cases of suspected doping. If this is part of your business and your charter, then budget for it.

Typical pseudo-governmental agency. I’m surprised they aren’t considering a doping tax to be added to the purchase of all new bicycles sold in the U.S.




Full Post with Comments...

Monday, March 17, 2008

Monday Roundup

Happy St. Patrick's Day!


News

The CyclingNews reports Paris-Nice winner Davide Rebellin is not worried about the UCI's threats to suspend and fine riders who took part in the race after, all if they suspend all the riders who else will compete this year? Nice to know someone has such faith that the UCI will do the "right" thing. Rebellin comments further on the "new age" of cycling citing an illustration of how "wrong" things went last week for one cyclist:

According to the Venetian, the new anti-doping programs for which the UCI has taken most of the responsibilities has changed the face of cycling. "We have given our total availability to make our sport the cleanest possible," he underlined. "We give our blood, our urine, our hair. We can't do more than that. We are normal people, not gangsters, so we just ask the controllers to respect our private life. What happened with Kevin van Impe shouldn't be done, we've naturally protested against that today."


KPLC writes about the visit Floyd Landis made to Louisiana this past weekend in support of BHR hip replacement. Landis also rode in a charity find raising event while there.


The Boulder Report writes today mostly about why Cadel Evans is someone who might get on one's nerves, but Joe Lindsey saved some space to whine about why he wants his money back from Floyd Landis:

-From an AP story by Eddie Pells about the still-mounting costs, on both sides, of Floyd Landis’ doping case. Like other curious folks, last spring I paid $35 to hear Floyd speak at one of his Floyd Fairness Fund events in Colorado. At the time, I chalked it up as a cost of doing business. But now, I want my fu***** money back – Hey Herr Doctor, ever hear of Lufthansa?

AP is reporting a study at the Annals of Internal Medicine suggesting that HgH doesn't do much useful as a PED, specifically increasing lactate buildup, which would be bad for cyclists. The cited study admits to being preliminary, and not considering synergetic benefits with other substances.

WSJ reports on the same HGH study.

Blogs
Rant writes about the split in the Agency for Cycling Ethics that saw Paul Scott leave the fledgling private anti-doping group over his continued work on the Landis case, which predates the creation of A.C.E. Rant feels that members of anti-doping agencies and athletes alike are between a rock and hard place. With WADA rules the way they are, who will explain and represent the science of a case to an athlete accused of doping?

Racejunkie looks at AP/Pells's article last week, and says the conclusion to be drawn is that taxes are Landis' fault too:
[T]here's a brand new outrage to stick on him: he alone is sucking up your precious tax dollars that could be used to fill deserving potholes in your own neighborhood with his malicious selfish whining about "Justice this!" and "Fair play that!"

Full Post with Comments...

Sunday, March 16, 2008

Sunday Roundup

photo courtesy Mark Kirsch


It's been a long harsh winter throughout the country this year, but the
swallows always fly back to Capistrano, just as the buzzards return to Hinckley Ohio, and here in Western New York State we have our first signs of spring as well. In our neighborhood we tap the sugar maples to make syrup. Can warm spring weather be far behind? Get those bikes ready to go!


News

The CyclingNews reports the French cycling federation has made the unlikely request that the UCI executive board resign. FFC president Jean Pitallier invoked images of the storming of the Bastille in a speech made before the beginning of stage six of Paris-Nice in which he said the executive board should resign due to its threatened sanctions against teams participating in the race. In a "counter punch" the UCI has suspended all official contact with AIGCP, the International Association of Professional Cycling Teams, due to its recommendation that teams participate in Paris-Nice despite the UCI's advice not to.

The VeloNews reports a protest staged by the peloton before Paris-Nice today. It was in support of Kevin Van Impe who was asked for a test sample as he was planning the funeral of his infant son. Many riders, though happy that cycling is endeavoring to be as clean and above board as possible, are concerned that the doping controls lack consistency and invade too much of the cyclists' time. They are not, after all, gangsters.

Ohio.com proves that little things like "details" don't really matter much when you're trying to get a reaction to a headline. "Taxpayers to Pay for Landis Defense" insinuates that we have footed the bill not only for USADA's prosecution of the case, but also for all of Floyd Landis' defense as well. Let's never let the truth get in the way of "journalistic" sensationalism. Landis has enough on his plate without being stoned by angry US taxpayers. They are getting hammered in comments.

Full Post with Comments...

Saturday, March 15, 2008

Saturday Roundup

News
The AP posts an Eddie Pells report on the fiscal costs of the Landis case to the American taxpayer through USADA, as well as to Landis himself, who is said to be in financial difficulty. Requests for a statement from Landis or his representatives by the AP were unanswered. Pells' research estimates that the case has cost USADA between 5-10% of its budget. The closed CAS hearing takes place as if the previous USADA hearing at Pepperdine never happened with testimony being presented as if new. The hearing starts in a Manhattan law office on Wednesday and is scheduled to last approximately five days. Travis Tygrat repeated a statement he's made before:

"Generally, we would always prefer to spend our time and resources in supporting clean athletes and not having to prosecute guilty ones," USADA CEO Travis Tygart said Friday.

Which makes as little sense now as it did the first few times he's rolled it out. The job of USADA is to prosecute cases, not to "support clean athletes" by anything other than "management" of cases. Pells goes on to note that USOC paid for the first round, but not the appeal which is on USADA's dime, nothing that Landis has never had any intention of competing in the Olympics.

The VeloNews addresses the reasons given for the split in A.C.E. between Paul Scott and Paul Strauss. As suggested earlier in cycling forums Scott resigned from the agency due to his continuing support for the Landis case. Former Rock Racing DS Frankie Andreu is critical of Landis and Scott for working together on the science of his case, but due to WADA rules finding a scientist to testify on an athlete's behalf is easier said than done, as Landis notes:
“I have no choice but to hire somebody, because I don’t know anything about science ... But as soon as I hire someone, everyone is saying, ‘Oh, Floyd’s paying him.’ Well, what choice do I have? You’re stuck either way.

All of the people who express skepticism of Scott wrap it in the position that there is something unseemly with someone involved in ACE taking a position in any case, suggesting conflict of interest. We don't see that. Last time we checked, ACE never tested Landis, nor was ACE hired by Landis' team. It looks to us like the same kind of double-think "ethics" as the WADA code -- a false propriety getting in the way of looking for truth and justice, as if those were some kind of hot-potatoes one should avoid seeking.

And hey, Ace, if someone you were testing is accused of something, and your data doesn't support the conclusion, you darned well better become involved, or those folks you're sticking constantly might not be so appreciative of your efforts. Independence doesn't mean you never take a stand, it means you're not obliged to take a particular stand before the facts are in.

In an earlier edition of CyclingNews Bernard Laporte, the French Secretary for Sport, says that the French cycling federation has come under the protection of the agency who says that all the federation is doing is taking its sport back from the UCI.

Feltet.dk
, machine translated, reports The Man came for an OoC test while Kevin van Impe was in the middle of making arrangements for the funeral of his son, who died six hours after birth. No, he could not come back later, or it would have been a "missed test":
"Luckily I had written in my whereabout's that I this week mainly would be at the hospital. Now I can so change next week write that I can meet at Monday in the crematorium in Lochristi. That system is simply not humane", a bitter Kevin van Impe said.

Velonews has an English version, and it doesn't come off any better.

Blogs
Rant thinks that Pat McQuaid and Martin Dugard have something in common this week, they both spoke before they thought about what they were going to say. Rant cites McQuaid's odd doublespeak on Alberto Contador, who he now supports but might ban IF Contador can somehow get the courts to allow him to race the TdF, and Martin Dugard in regards to his turnaround on Floyd Landis' guilt, which he fails to rationalize with any kind of explanation. Rant wonders if maybe Mr. Dugard just doesn't get the science of the case and has decided to find Floyd guilty on the basis of, a hunch? Open mouth, insert foot.

Bicycle.NET has Larry Behrendt write his version of Suh's opening statement for next week's appeal hearing. It focuses on the Elephant in the Room, being the fundamental unfairness of the process as embodied in the actions of the greater WADA community: They're all dopers, so what does it matter?

Potholes and Roadapples writes about hometown boy Floyd Landis' upcoming CAS hearing to begin on Wednesday in NYC. B Harris notes that this hearing will not be covered live either by web stream or blogging.

Velo Vortmax has much more to say about the Dugard drubbing of Floyd Landis' reputation as he notes Dugard's defensive response to outraged "quasi" cycling fans, VV included:
So, Martin, you are entitled to your opinion and I am entitled to mine. I don't believe you. I don't believe that Floyd Landis told you in confidence that Lance Armstrong used PEDs. Also, I do not believe that Floyd Landis told Greg LeMond that he used PEDs in the 2006 Tour de France. In America a man has the opportunity to confront his accusers. This is called due process. This opportunity was denied Floyd Landis in the kangaroo court of an AAA hearing. LeMond was whisked out of the court room in a rush before anyone could cross examine his motives and agenda. What a farce.

Phantom Reflections thinks that if the UCI says it will back Alberto Contador in a court fight against the ASO why not back Levi Leipheimer too? Why not Floyd Landis who PR feels has been the victim of a smear campaign? Why not indeed!

20 Million Minutes gives us a tribute to Richard Burke, the founder of Trek Bikes, who passed away earlier this week.

Full Post with Comments...

Friday, March 14, 2008

Friday Roundup

News
The CyclingNews notes that the French Sports Secretary is now proclaiming his interest in mediating the ASO/UCI dustup, with promises to protect French riders IF the UCI follows through on threatened sanctions against them. Meanwhile Pat McQuaid says that the riders are "victims" in the war between the UCI and ASO. McQuaid was in Spain to discuss the reopening of OP and these are his first public comments since the beginning of Paris-Nice:

McQuaid, who prior to Paris-Nice had sent letters and made statements threatening riders with fines and suspensions if they participated in the event outside the UCI's rules backed off from that firm stance a bit this week. "I said what I had to say. The race is taking place outside of the rules of the UCI," he said. "When it finishes we will sit down and look at all the circumstances and consider the data that we have. The riders have asked for a meeting. They are victims and have been forced to take a stand, they are employees of teams that cannot be denied participation because it is their livelihood. The UCI will take this into account in determining sanctions."

The VeloNews reports Pat McQuaid as saying he has Alberto Contador's back should Contador decide to take legal action over his team's exclusion from this year's Tour de France:
"If Contador decides to take legal action in Spain or internationally myself and the UCI will give evidence in his favor and I will be a witness," McQuaid told the daily El Mundo.

"I know Contador and the people around him and I know that he is a clean and honest rider," added McQuaid of the rider who has had to fend off questions regarding his alleged links to Spanish blood-doping probe Operation Puerto.

The VeloNews also reports that former poster child for UCI/ASO dysfunction Unibet is back with a new name, Cycle Collstrop.

ESPN writes Australia's anti-doping agency feels perfectly within its rights to be secretly checking athletes private medical records for evidence of PED use:

John Mendoza, former ASADA boss and now a professor of health science at the University of the Sunshine Coast, said he is concerned the investigation may be too invasive.

"It's certainly a bold move and I am not aware of any other jurisdiction in the world that's taken this move," Mendoza told ABC. "It's potentially a dangerous move because it's casting a question mark against all athletes."

AskMen.com posts the top ten "steroid excuses", Floyd Landis' comes in at number eight. Just two more scandals and he'll drop out of sight.

Blogs
Racejunkie spends a lot of time this morning discussing the ins and outs of various Italian doping scandals, with Patrik Sinkewitz thrown in for good measure.

Dugard responds to criticism of his grenade of yesterday in his blog, and yes,
It was to be a story about me, not Floyd,



We are reminded:



If that doesn't play, try THIS. It's been said of Disney's Beauty and the Beast that we've all known a Gaston. It's also true we've all known an Anita.

Full Post with Comments...

Thursday, March 13, 2008

Thursday Roundup

News
Velonews is reporting CSC is not renewing sponsorship of Riis' team. It's this year or never for them to take a Tour for their long-term sponsor.

Boulder Report's Joe Lindsey in a two-fer today, takes on the Dugard piece we reported yesterday, and engages in some handwringing, being unimpressed both by Dugard and by the journalistic standards that allowed a lot to happen over time.

In the same section where he levels Floyd's incrimination of his former team leader, Dugard writes about that contrast between what cycling fans think of athletes and how they really are. "They don't see the riders as being the same as any other human being, capable of great frailty and prone to temptation," he writes. No one's ever accused journalists of being greater than other human beings. But the frailty and temptation parts, that part Dugard got right. Maybe, in the end, the story isn't so much about Floyd's failings or even Lance's, as much as it is about Dugard's own, and the failures of our profession.

The Boulder Report's Joe Lindsey speculates that maybe Paddy "Dean Wormer" McQuaid is just getting his Irish up for St Patrick's Day with all of the machinations over the ASO and Paris-Nice. Lindsey casts Wormer, um McQuaid, in the role of the original "double secret probationer", but is McQuaid all bark and no bite?:
After two years of scuffling that closely resembles a pushing match between eighth-grade boys (a few half-hearted shoves and insults, after which both parties disengage so as not to be late for fourth period), the ASO finally took a real swing. And it may have revealed that McQuaid, for all his bluster and tough talk, has a glass jaw.

ESPN reports that former cyclist Tammy Thomas has once again pleaded not guilty to perjury charges before a grand jury:
A grand jury handed down a new indictment against Tammy Thomas on Tuesday with five counts of perjury -- two more than previously alleged -- and an obstruction charge. She pleaded not guilty Wednesday to the new charges.

The CyclingNews reader mail column is predictably dominated by responses to the ASO/UCI mess.

A reader points us to a Seattle Times article report the Washington State Supreme Court has struck down random, no-suspicion tests on student athletes, for mixed reasons. We take it as a sign the momentum of the pendulum may be changing, and that there are limits in the war on doping.

STLToday/Leuking looks at CSC's departure, and thinks it is doping and/or UCI v ASO related. We're not so sure about that - eight years is a long time for a title sponsor in cycling anytime in the last 30 years.

Blogs
CFA feels that Martin Dugard has stabbed Floyd Landis in the back, and in doing so he has revealed the "thin veneer" of his knowledge about cycling, not to mention people:
Martin Dugard stabs Floyd Landis in the back, with a totally irritating and vacuous article which says nothing much at all. He pretends to be writing about Floyd, but he's not. The whole article is really about himself and his opinions. Dugard cribs the usual bits from Coyle's Lance Armstrong's War, forgets totally the idea of substance over style, showcases his usual blatantly self-important tone, and conveniently pretends to be a cycling expert, which he is not. Just try reading his blog for a while and you'll notice that when it comes to pro cycling, he has a thin veneer of knowledge which only occasionally hides the yawning vacuum of ignorance that lies beneath. I grew increasingly disgusted with his blog long ago after he kept writing total garbage in his so-called Tour coverage, confusing riders and getting their names wrong, totally ignoring the realities of doping, and clearly misunderstanding the most basic of team tactics. Anyone who doesn't know the difference between IBAN Mayo and IVAN Basso has no business passing himself off as an "expert" on cycling. Any half-decent European cycling fan knows about 100 times more than Dugard. I think the only race he's ever heard of is the Tour, and I really couldn't care less what he thinks about Landis

Mike V wonders what happened to the "heroes" of cycling and snarks that Floyd Landis should go ahead and exercise his last appeal, which is very big of him. Mike is tired of reading about dopers anyway, and thinks Landis should just "except" the fact that he doped. Huh?

Chris@Podium Cafe comments on the sponsorship crisis that is engulfing pro cycling.

WADAwatch has instituted a "WADA Signatory of the Year Award for 2007" for breaches to the WADA code, etc. Nominations end March 28 and you can participate:
Nominations to date, would have to include France, the British Olympic Committee for its Chambers case (Which WADAwatch feels is a proper domestic situation, and hasn't addressed the issues, per se), and _______________ (fill in your very favorite by emailing WADAwatch >>>).



Full Post with Comments...

Wednesday, March 12, 2008

Wednesday Roundup

News
The SunHerald hypes a Martin Dugard piece in Orangecoast.com that purportedly reveals his true opinions on Floyd Landis' guilt or innocence. Here's the link to the (whole?) story:

...In "Doubting Floyd," Dugard, who has covered the Tour de France since 1999, reveals his startling conclusions about the man who rode headlong into the center of the world doping controversy during the 2006 Tour with "the most daring and astonishing ride anyone could remember ... Just two days after being crowned champion, the Tour de France announced it no longer considered him the winner. The urine samples taken just after his ride into Morzine had tested positive. Rather than return to America as a hero -- like Lance -- Floyd did the perp walk on Leno and Larry King ... Floyd became a punch line."

It's a weird piece, where he says Floyd told him that "Lance doped", and concluding that he thinks Floyd did "it", without being clear what "it" is in question. We can probably assume he won't be getting a Christmas card from the Landis family this year.

The CyclingNews cops its now standard attitude towards Floyd Landis as it too cites yesterday's CAS announcement of next week's six day appeal hearing in New York City.

In later CyclingNews Christian Prudhomme reacts to an open letter to the ASO from Germany which states the obvious, cycling is in great danger..

The VeloNews
says that the CAS hearings for Italian riders Danilo DiLuca and Alessandro Petacchi have been set. DiLuca's hearing will take place March 20, and Petacchi's on April 2.

In more VeloNews Patrik Sinkewitz is quoted as saying he did NOT pass "concrete" evidence on to officials about former T-Mobile teammates.

SI.com posts a story on steroids in America and wonders who the real dopes are, and how many are out there:

We are a nation looking for enhancement, a way to age gracefully, perform better and longer, and, at the outer edge, vanquish what was once considered that alltime undefeated opponent known as aging. We do that by Botoxing our wrinkles, lifting our faces, reconstructing our noses, despidering our veins, tucking our tummies, augmenting our breasts and taking a little pill to make sure we're ready when, you know, the right time presents itself. We also do it by injecting human growth hormone (HGH) and testosterone, America's new golden pharmaceutical couple

The NY Times reports links between a doctor in California who wrote illegal prescriptions, and several major league baseball players for whom he is alleged to have prescribed PEDs.

Passing
The founder of Trek Bicycles, Richard Burke, died Monday from complications of heart surgery in December. Good obits in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, and the AP. TBV still rides his 1983 and '99 road bikes, and the '86 MTB. Mrs. TBV has an '84 road bike and an '85 MTB, all Treks made in Waterloo.

Blogs
Rant takes note of Floyd Landis' closed door last ditch CAS appeal next week, and he speculates that no matter what the outcome the damage done to Landis' career and reputation can likely never be repaired.

The picture painted by the first round of hearings was decidedly unpleasant. One thing became clear, once the case was turned over by USADA to their outside counsel, the focus was no longer on a search for the truth. It was on winning and losing, and doing whatever it takes to win. Fairness was not a part of the equation, at least not for Richard Young and company. Legal maneuvering was. And, to give the devil his due, Young and his associates in certain instances out-maneuvered Landis’ lawyers.

Je writes that though he has little sympathy for Floyd Landis, he hopes that Landis wins his CAS appeal next week so that the testing standards within WADA labs can be amended.

Max reveals optimistic sentiments about the forthcoming appeal hearing. We won't be placing any bets. As before, we're hoping for a reasoned and convincing decision either way, which we did not get the first time around.

Velo Vortmax
writes "Doubting Dugard", disputing almost everything Martin Dugard has to say about Floyd Landis in his "expose" from OrangeCoast Magazine. This is a good response that will probably go unnoticed in the forthcoming hysteria about the Lance claim.



Full Post with Comments...

Tuesday, March 11, 2008

Tuesday Roundup

News
AP/Graham Dunbar previews the Landis Appeal hearing, starting next Weds, March 19th in NY, and running over both sides of the Easter weekend. Joy for all involved, we're sure. It's going to be closed-door, so don't expect live blogging, or daily reports unless people are feeling talkative at the end of each day. It is angling to be a much drier affair than the hearing in Malibu.

The VeloNews Mailbag covers topics ranging from the opinion that Pat McQuaid just doesn't get it, to one respondent who feels it's the riders are traitors. Go figure.

The CyclingNews'
last update from yesterday has Pat McQuaid feeling "benevolent" as he relents on a threatened appeal of Jorge Jaksche's one year ban:

"UCI boss Pat McQuaid called me on the weekend and personally told me of the decision," Jaksche, 33, told the German press agency sid. "A stone fell from my heart. Now the hard times are finally over, I can start making plans again."

He added that a cooperative witness like himself "no longer needs to pay for his openness. They have finally realised that doping is an octopus with many arms. It is a system which is carried out by team managers, soigneurs, doctors and athletes." He said that he assumed that now the UCI would take actions against those he named in his confession.

In more recent CyclingNews it appears that thus far the UCI is holding its cards very close to its vest as no sign has been given as to what actions it might seek against riders who are participatiing in Paris-Nice. We hold our collective breath.

Blogs
Sara Best wonders what may of us have wondered over the past year and a half, where would Floyd Landis be now IF he had rolled over and done what he was told?

WADAwatch points to blind spots In L'Equipe regarding substantive discussion of the non-UCI motives in the current disputes. No coincidence that L'Equipe it is owned by the very same ASO that is one of the antagonists. He also points us to an old piece wherein he finds himself introduced to Damien Ressiot.

Racejunkie covers subjects from the defiance of the UCI by its riders to being sure you don't trade your valuable, and rather ironic, equipment to a street pusher for drugs. Sturm und Drang indeed. She's also continuing her windmill tilting over her fave:
[W]here the hell is Iban Mayo's CAS ruling on how completely grotesquely the vindictive cornered rabid snarling raccoons at UCI have chewed him to pieces by ignoring their own rules on B-sample results, I mean, on his perfectly objectively fact-driven prosecution goddammit?

Caught on the Run
has borrowed a Cycleops PowerTap 2.4 for two weeks and plans on making good use of it in his training.

A Tad Askew posts what feels like an ancient quote from Floyd Landis. Was life ever really this amusingly simple?:
While eating lunch today, I was reminded of a funny story regarding Floyd Landis and his reaction to someone saying a rider always gave 110%. His reaction was "Why stop there? If you can go over 100%, why not give 100,000% or 1,000,000%? Why stop at 100?"

Full Post with Comments...

Monday, March 10, 2008

Monday Roundup

News
STLToday's Dave Leucking gives his own perspective on the ASO/UCI fight and what might await those who started Paris-Nice yesterday. He sees rival cycling leagues, a Tour of America, and all sorts of chaos:


I then see this whole thing evolving into rival cycling leagues, with the ASO and the Tour deFrance and the other grand tours off on one side and the UCI on the other. The teams … they’ll go where their sponsors want them to go, and I’m not sure that’s automatically the grand tours. Of course, the grand tours have cachet out the ying-yang, but the UCI Pro Tour has a larger global footprint and might be more appealing to sponsors who want to reach a global market. (CSC, for instance, is an American company sponsoring a Danish team. QuickStep, too, is an American company sponsoring a Belgian team.)

The ASO and the grand tours cover four countries — France, Belgium, Spain and Italy, a limited market compared to the UCI. Maybe this will be a chance for the U.S. to get a grand tour, under the UCI auspices. There’s already talk of the Tour of California becoming a three-week event, and the elite riders and teams do seem to like competing in the three big U.S. races — Tour of California, Tour de Georgia and Tour of Missouri.


The CyclingNews posts an interview with Slipstream's David Millar, and the most surprising aspect of the piece is how little doping is mentioned.

The Independant (IE) gives an amusing Q/A about refusing competition to athletes who have finished their bans, concluding:
Q: [...] how can we reasonably trust him to be clean now?

A: We can't. But, then, we can't trust anyone.

Q: So how the hell do we weed out cheats?

A: Polygraph booths maybe?


Which is obviously a joke, because polygraphs aren't reliable either.


Blogs
Fatty names himself as the winner of the 2008 Bloggie for sports. Can you do that? And has his "victory" led to the problems encountered by the Bloggies? Had we only known.

Barry says it's politics on wheels, it's always been politics on wheel we just see it for what it truly is now.

LJ Abram has a post with a bunch of aphorisms, including:
There’s only one rule: the guy who trains the hardest wins. - Floyd Landis (except, for him, sadly, it seems there are two rules...)



Full Post with Comments...

Sunday, March 09, 2008

Sunday Roundup

News
Late CyclingNews covers Paris-Nice, noting the teams showed up -- and the weather helped Thor Hushovd who left the winner of the Prologue. Top US rider was Danny Pate of TSC in 6th; teammate Trent Lowe was 10th and David Millar 12th, which must be a disappointment since he said he was targeting this race. Next American was Craig Lewis, High Road, 20th. Credit Agricole, CSC, and Slipstream Chipotle each had two in the top-10. Lanterne Rouge to Tyler Farrar of TSC, who may not be fully recovered from his woes at the ToC.

They also talk about Kloden denying the claims that Sinkewitz has fingered him as a fellow blood-doper before the 2006 Tour, and frustrated the rumours are being presented as leaks of confidential interviews with the prosecutors.

Cycling Weekly notes that most of the "big stars" have defied the UCI's call for boycott and have started Paris-Nice.

The VeloNews' Andrew Hood writes about the "cloud" under which Paris-Nice starts today. Click here for VeloNews live updates. Here is the first update of the day as the race begins:

It's business as usual at the start of Paris-Nice despite a contentious week of political in-fighting between the UCI and ASO. Cycling has an incredible ability to shrug off adversity and get down to the business of racing bikes. Be it doping scandals, power struggles or other calamities, the power of simply getting on with it seems to the carry the day. That's the sense here in Amilly for the start of the 4.6km opening prologue course. Power struggles be damned - everyone here just wants to race their bikes.


In more VeloNews German prosecutors have offered Jan Ullrich a "deal" which would include a hefty fine and "cooperation" with the authorities.

The CyclingNews is late writing about Paris-Nice as, but rehashes the events of the past few days. In other news Rock Racing is hoping against hope for a spot in Milano-San Remo.

The NY Times writes late yesterday about the bottom line in the dispute between the ASO and UCI, with no less a rider than David Millar saying that this split may ultimately be for the best.

There is sure to be more Paris-Nice news soon, updates are coming

Blogs
PuddinRider says his good news is that the avascular necrosis in his left femoral head (like Landis had) that will need replacement isn't directly related to the multiple myeloma that has him starting radiation treatment next week. He's carrying a positive outlook.

Velo Vortmax
reviews how Astana, the ASO, and the UCI arrived at this uncomfortable place in time, which finds all interested parties standing at the brink of a brave new cycling world.

Full Post with Comments...

Saturday, March 08, 2008

Saturday Roundup

News
Late, the AP previews Paris-Nice saying the teams are probablyl riding, and the UCI is looking weak. By the time of the morning edition, we'll know for sure.

The VeloNews suggests how closely riders should have read the UCI rule book before they signed the back of their license. It goes on to explain how the UCI can punish them if they ride Paris-Nice. The UCI's Martin Gibbs reiterates Pat McQuaid's email to riders and teams and there is more at stake than just fines:

That rule allows the UCI president to impose penalties "such as” exclusion from the world championships, continental championships or the Olympics.

If nothing else, rule 12.1.004 reveals the UCI president's immense latitude. Which, after this discussion of how the UCI can penalize Paris-Nice riders, raises the question of why he thinks it's in the interest of cycling punish riders for taking part in one of the most prestigious races in the world.

The St Catherines Standard wonders if cycling hasn't now turned into mere tabloid fodder with the ASO/UCI showdown, but despite it all they still remember watching Bob Roll expound on the accomplishments of "deceiver" Floyd Landis. It may all comes down to entertainment, WWE style. Bottom line, we can still love cycling "warts" and all.

The AFP notes Marion Jones' incarceration began yesterday as she turned herself in to begin a six month sentence for perjury. The piece also states that this case indicates doping investigations will no longer be left to sports federations and anti-doping organizations. The federal government is now getting involved as indicated in a widening investigation of Roger Clemens, and the pursuance of the case against Barry Bonds.

Sally Jenkins/Washington Post wrote the other day that the current prosecutions are backwards in targeting users rather than dealers.
A lot of things may come out of this, but truth and justice aren't among them. If Congress and government prosecutors really care about cleaning up steroids, why are they being harder on the users than their connections?
...

It's tempting to say all three of the people under discussion are indefensible. They are cheats and liars. Fine. But even guilty people [Clemens, Bonds, Jones] deserve commensurate treatment under the law. Somewhere along the line, we drifted into the territory of vengeance and political gain, not righteousness.

The fact is, any number of public figures, starting with Big Tobacco executives, have told much bigger lies to Congress than Clemens did, and none faced perjury charges. You want a brazen, damaging public lie? How about, "Tobacco isn't addictive"?
...
In the rank of drug cases, steroid usage is in the same class legally as taking Valium or Vicodin without a legitimate prescription

Jenkins threw Landis under the bus over The Call; perhaps the pendulum is starting to change direction.

The AP reports the Nolan Ryan, the career strikeout leader who set the standard for late-career achievement, is saying Baseball "turned its back" on steroids. It sounds perilously close to LeMond.

The AP
also quotes Bud Selig, the Baseball commissioner, as not feeling a need to read the Bonds testimony at this time. No Bud, it's not important and would take too much of your precious time. Fortunately, you don't have to read it yourself, you can read our summary from last Sunday, since we must have more time than you to follow the details of this major case the hangs like a cloud over your entire tenure as Commissioner. No need for you to actually know the details of what Bonds said, it would only cloud your vision. Here's one of the parts he repeated: "I don't trust baseball", meaning the Baseball establishment, which is to say, you.

Blogs
CFA says they're all just lemmings racing for the cliff.

Rant feels the ASO and UCI learned nothing from last year's battles as both sides in the current dispute have dug in their heels, and as always the teams and riders are caught in the middle destined to be collateral damage.

Spinnin'Wheel yesterday watched one retiree who just "loved the game", and gives numerous examples of the courage demonstrated over the years by various cyclists. Who can say that the ASO or UCI shows any kind of courage now?

Belgian Knee Warmers
notes ASO's treatment of Astana shows it isn't bluffing, and the riders have the least say of anyone.
Added up, the UCI is threatening to suspend more than 1000 cyclists if 20 teams show up to Paris-Nice.

Such an action may seem inconceivable (in any rational world, it would be), but crazy knows no bounds; it is the mind unfettered by the by the guidance of the creative urge that keeps so many artists and writers part of productive society. It may seem unreasonable to us that the UCI would threaten so many over what seems so minor—racers racing an event that’s been going on since 1933—but if the UCI backs down, its authority will have been effectively broken.

A quick shake of the Magic 8-Ball says: “Things will get worse.”


Full Post with Comments...