Early Saturday Roundup

News
The San Francisco Chronicle prints an AP piece by Eddie Pells on what promises to be an extraordinary day at that Floyd Landis vs USADA heairngs, Landis himself will at last take the stand in his own defense:

After sitting quietly at his hearing for five days, Landis was scheduled to be sworn in for testimony Saturday in the most-anticipated moment of an arbitration process he hopes will confirm he's the Tour de France champion.

The world would get to hear Landis' version of events that led to a positive test for synthetic testosterone — and he should finally get a chance to put his spin on a case that has not been going well, at least from a public-relations standpoint.

The VeloNews Antonio Gallegos analyzes yesterday's session of the Landis hearings noting that both USADA and Landis scored points on the science. The Landis team got USADA expert Dr Christiane Ayotte to admit to some irregularities on the part of the LNDD, though she felt none of those things would affect the final test results produced by the lab. This was countered by Landis expert witness Dr Bruce Goldberger:

In Goldberger's opinion, LNDD's chain of custody documentation and procedure for documenting errors calls into question the reliability of LNDD's lab work. He further testified that the poor quality of the chromatographs LNDD prepared and used to analyze at least one Landis's samples also call into question LNDD's work.

Another witness, Joe Papp former cyclist, discussed how he used testosterone gel to his advantage as a competitor, how it helped him recover from difficult stages of a bike race, and how he stayed under the detection limit in doing so thus contradicting Landis' claims that the PED for which he tested positive would be of no benefit


The Boulder Report's Joe Lindsey wonders why Greg LeMond testified on Thursday,and apparently everyone was caught off guard by what he said and the result therein:

In the end, I feel sorry for three people here: I feel sorry for Landis, because his defense deserved better than to be saddled with this. The arbitrators may well not take Geoghegan’s actions or LeMond’s testimony into account, but from a PR standpoint, it looked terrible for Floyd – his public hearing has backfired in the worst way imaginable.

And I feel sorry for Geoghegan. Yes, it was stupid, sophomoric and ill-considered. Not only did he intervene with a material witness (possibly a felony), he needlessly damaged Landis’ public image, and heckled LeMond about sexual abuse, of all things. Talk about hitting the trifecta. I’d love to say that I’ve never done anything that dumb, but I’ve certainly done dumb things when I was a kid – if a cop was around, I’d easily have been arrested for some of them. They just didn’t take place with reporters from the Associated Press and the Los Angeles Times looking on. Geoghegan will forever be saddled with the moniker “Uncle Ron,” the name he reportedly used when he called LeMond. That’s going to be tough to ever get past. Geoghegan dredged up what was likely the worst experience in LeMond’s life and thoughtlessly scraped the wound raw. But I would like to see some compassion here from Greg: if you can, please, find it in your heart to forgive Will.

Lastly, I feel for LeMond. He’s been roundly vilified for his criticism of “our Lance.” I’ve talked to cyclists who viscerally hate him, I’ve read posts on message boards from people who flame him and brag about how they sold their LeMond bikes or taped over his name on the frame in protest. He’d just begun to move past that when this case threw it all back in the spotlight. And somehow we’re to believe he enjoys this?

The CyclingNews summarizes yesterday's Landis hearings noting that the testimony has reverted back to examining the scientific issues of the case.


The VeloNews Foaming Rant is disgusted with Floyd Lamdis and with Will Geoghegan's tactics against Greg LeMond revealed on Thursday. He thinks anyone who gave even a plug nickel to the FFF should demand their money back.

Blogs
Rant is off to an early start today with his wrap up of yesterday's witnesses and the beginning of the defense. He finds no real evidence to support Joe Papp's assertions that testosterone helped him in recovery from long stages of bike races. Rant feels that USADA's "win at all costs" mentality is there for all to see in their willingness to sacrifice anyone to beat Landis. Rant then previews today's witnesses, two of whom will be Dr. Don Catlin, founder of the Olympic Analytical Laboratory at UCLA, and Floyd Landis himself Today should prove to be very challenging as well as interesting.

Opinio Juris has posted an opinion on witness tampering and possible obstruction of justice in arbitration hearings, specifically as it relates to Will Geoghegan during the Landis hearings this week. Thanks Judge Hue for the tip.


The Pain Train thinks one of the resosn that Greg LeMond testified this week at the Landis hearings is that he cannot stand to be forgotten.

Greg's Soapbox/ Therapy Couch thinks that things can't get any worse at the Landis hearings, and it's getting harder to believe Floyd all the time.

PelotonJim wants us to remember that what's happening in California is not the only or even best cycling game in town, there is the Giro D'Italia.

The Durruti Column thinks that cycling has indeed embarked on a "race to the bottom"

WorcesterRight wonders what we all do, what will Floyd Landis say today as he testifies in his own defense in the hearings at Pepperdine University.

Pommi is hoping for long recesses and a longer lunch break today so that he can be back home in time to see Floyd Landis on the stand.

Triple Crankset tells us what happened at yesterday's Landis hearings, and is excited about the prospect of Floyd Landis testifying in his own defense today. Crankset takes note of USADA trying to discredit Landis witness Dr. Bruce Goldberger yesterday, who then produced a surprise:

USADA attorneys were cross-examining Landis' first witness, University of Florida professor Bruce Goldberger, trying to puncture his credibility by getting him to admit his expertise wasn't specifically in steroid testing. Goldberger responded by producing a letter he recently received from the WADA-approved lab at UCLA, asking him to apply for the job recently vacated by lab director Don Catlin ... which quickly prompted a new line of questioning.

.

Burt Friggin Hoovis raced against USADA witness Joe Papp, ands Burt forgives him for doping, but thinks his testimony yesterday at the Landis hearings was irrelevant.

SportNet2 recites some of what Joe Papp talked about at the Landis hearings yesterday,including the pack of andro gel he held up, and also notes the science that was discussed.

Full Post with Comments...

The Winnowing: Bruce Goldberger

Bruce Goldberger Phd, is prominent forensic toxicologist, and lab director who testified for Landis at both hearings. Prior to involvement in the Landis case, he'd been invited to apply as a candidate to replace Catlin as Director of the UCLA WADA laboratory.


As many people know, I was reluctant to get involved in the Landis case as I do not work for (and never have) an anti-doping laboratory. I have been practicing forensic toxicology for more than 25 years and much of my work has focused on novel analytical techniques and quality assurance/quality control procedures.

But, when given the opportunity to study the materials from the LNDD laboratory, I immediately agreed to work with Howard Jacobs and Maurice Suh. I was distressed by the quality and interpretation of the analytical data, chain-of-custody documentation, etc. If the Landis case was prosecuted in a U.S. Court of Law, the data would have never met the Frye and/or Daubert standards of evidence.

Also, I learned quickly that the WADA Anti-doping program was constructed to such a degree that accused athletes are greatly disadvantaged when defending themselves. For example, WADA Laboratory Directors cannot consult for an accused athlete; and defense experts like myself are criticized because of a "lack of expertise and experience". Further, the WADA IST and ISL are woefully inadequate to ensure a fair and equitable system which protects the rights of the athlete while ensuring the success of an anti-doping program.

Finally, I want to thank TBV for maintaining a blog devoted to the Floyd Landis doping allegations. It has been a valuable source of information.

Bruce Goldberger, Ph.D., DABFT

Full Post with Comments...

Thursday Roundup

News
Wired Science cites a study in which it's been determined that a placebo is just as effective as a pain killing opiate for athletes as the real deal:

The World Anti-Doping agency allows competitors to take opiate painkillers while training, but not on the day of their events. However, if a placebo can trick their opiate-conditioned bodies into a feel-no-pain state, they'll get the same boost that would be illegal if produced by the real drug.

The CyclingNews plays catch up and posts Sunday's comments from Prof. Bruce Goldberger on the Landis case. It also looks like another tell-all book about Jan Ullrich is in the works. This afternoon's CyclingNews update contains a number of interesting items. Michael Rasmussen will hold a press conference and make what appears to be a preemptive statement about his removal from the TdF last summer and subsequent firing from Rabobank. Also, Armand Mégret, the official doctor of the Fédération Française de Cyclisme (FFC) has responded in an open letter to the UCI's proposed blood passport. According to Mégret, the project sealed by the UCI and WADA at an Anti-Doping summit in Paris two weeks ago is still much too vague:

"The World Anti-Doping Agency has imposed a [detection -ed.] method of which we ignore the application modalities, the cost, or the persons that will be tested," Mégret stated. "We don't know if this will be considered a tool in the fight against doping [resulting in suspensions - ed.] or a medical procedure leading to a no-start."

The doctor also wondered about the methodology of the tests, as well as legal aspects. "It is also necessary that the detection values be clear. Doping is not the only factor that can lead to these kind of variations. We have to be able to exclude biological anomalies caused by possible health problems of the athletes," he continued. "For this method, there is no operative system, no organisation, no method, no technical details to be applied by the labs, no kits or protocols to be used. Riders will only turn to courts, which will appoint experts to show the method is flawed, as usual."

In a further update The CyclingNews reports that Michael Rasmussen has admitted lying to the public but NOT to Rabobank about his whereabouts last spring:

I would like to clearly state that I was not in Mexico in June. I have therefore misinformed both the UCI and the public. It is however important for me to stress that at no point did I lie to the Rabobank team," Rasmussen said. Rasmussen insisted that his employer Rabobank knew the truth. "I have never told lies to Rabobank. They knew all the time where I was and why."

ESPN reports that Australian swimmer Ian Thorpe has been cleared of doping charges by FINA. And in another ESPN story it's noted that perhaps as a result of Operation Raw Deal the Chinese promise to clear out doping labs before next summer's Olympics in Beijing.

The San Diego Union Tribune notes that among many professional "stick and ball" athletes caught doping the worst punishment they may get is a pay raise. Floyd Landis is only mentioned in passing and is used to point up the injustice of the consequences some athletes face.

The Star Phoenix snarks that if you couldn't count on "humble Mennonite boy" Floyd Landis to compete fairly who can you count on?

Blogs
Rant was going to write more about cortisone when he saw the Matina Hingis WILL fight a positive for cocaine use after all and Ian Thorpe has been cleared by FINA. The cortisone discussion will continue at a later date.

PrawfsBlawg has quite a bit to say about the increasingly present asterisk in sports.

Ken Ungar feels the real victims of bad behavior by athletes are the athletes themselves, and they can go a long way in ameliorating this problem by taking responsibility for their actions.

Racejunkie is on the ball this afternoon with comments on today's Rasmussen press conference, and on Prof. Bruce Goldberger's statements concerning the LNDD's "lab work" in the Landis case.

Astropost says it's all right there in the stars, Neptune, and the hard aspect between the Sun and Jupiter. It's a bad omen for Floyd Landis, Marion Jones, and Michael Rasmussen. Who knew?

Black Chick on a Bike just read the CyclingNews post containing Prof. Goldberger's comments about the LNDD's testing practices and Floyd Landis, and she is horrified that such sloppiness is in any way acceptable in a professional lab:

I can't believe what I have just read at the above link concerning Floyd Landis's case! The use of WHITE OUT in a forensic toxicology testing lab??? I would totally get my ass fired if I did that! Whenever we make a mistake ANYWHERE, in our personal lab book, in our Calibration, Reagent Prep notebooks, on labels, etc. we HAVE to cross it out once and initial it. If we tape or paste anything into a book, notebook, etc. we have to initial it on two edges and date it. Our initials are kept in a record book next to our printed names and signatures so that people know if someone else is forging our initials. It's so anal, and only gets more so! Every sample, solutions, etc. is obsessively tracked and recorded a zillion times. Everything is labeled and stored correctly. It's crazy. I swear we spend most of our time doing this versus actual testing experiments. I'm not saying this is grounds for innocence, but, I would TOTALLY have his A-sample retested by the Sports Medicine Research and Testing lab here (at a competent facility)and then if positive, have the B-sample tested.

Full Post with Comments...

Late Friday Roundup

For news from earlier today see the Early Friday Roundup

News
The San Diego Union Tribune posts that finally after 5 days in a hearing room which has at times been contentious Floyd Landis will take the stand in his own defense tomorrow:

His folks and wife, who have sat stoically through these five days, should be on hand again. And maybe the hearing room, essentially void of public spectators since Monday, will fill up, too.

The schedule, with Landis' name on it, came out at the end of a long day of testimony Friday.

Reuters writes about the testimony today of former cyclist Joe Papp who admitted using testosterone gel in an effort to more quickly recover from tough stages in long bike races, something which the Floyd Landis defense had claimed would not be of use.

Canada.com posts an Eddie Pells (AP) piece written late Friday afternoon on testimony at the Floyd Landis vs USADA hearings. Pells first describes Joe Papp, former cyclist,who discusses how he used testosterone gel to his advantage as a competitor, how it helped him recover from difficult stages of a bike race, and how he stayed under the detection limit in doing so thus contradicting Landis' claims that the PED for which he tested positive would be of no benefit. The next witness called, Bruce Goldberger a professor from the University of Florida, was the first to testify for Landis:

He described himself as initially reluctant to get involved in the case.

“But I saw some glaring issues with the way the chemistry was performed in the laboratory,” Goldberger said of the French lab where the tests were done.

Earlier in the week, the Landis lawyers had used cross-examination of USADA witnesses to set up these arguments. But Goldberger was the first witness to connect the dots of the argument.

“It’s the pattern that concerns me,” he said. “I can’t trust it. I think it’s unreliable.”

As for gaps in the chain of custody, Goldberger said: “Terrible. Omissions in the chain of custody should demonstrate lack of attention.”

Earlier in the afternoon Christiane Ayotte finshed her appearance for USADA and under cross examination made one of the few concessions to the defense throughout her testimony:

Ayotte conceded the peaks in the graphs didn’t show the good “separation” the lawyers contend is needed in these graphs.

“But anyone can see the peak is nine times higher than the epi” peak, Ayotte said. “It’s more than 9-to-1.”

She said she came to that conclusion by eyeballing the graph.

“Is eyeballing it acceptable?” lawyer Howard Jacobs asked.

“No,” Ayotte replied.It was one of the few concessions the Landis team got from the lab director.

ESPN's The Magazine Shaun Assael writes that fans of Floyd Landis who contributed to the FFf, have been cheated by people who felt they were part of "The Sopranos".This is in reference to the harassing phone call Landis' former manager made to Greg LeMond, but:

Fortunately for Floyd, the people who donated to his fund don't seem to be having any buyer's remorse … at least not yet.

The San Francisco Chronicle posts Eddie Pells' AP afternoon report on what has been a much quieter day today at the Landis hearings. Landis lawyer Maurice Suh asked Dr. Christiane Ayotte, who is an USADA expert, if she thought there were significant differences in some test results performed on the machine that analyzed Landis' urine:

"There's one difference for one peak on a 'B' sample, and that's it," she said. "It doesn't create doubt about the rest of it."

Eurosport writes that fired Landis manage Will Geoghegan has issued an apology for a perceived threatening phone call to former Tour de France winner and USADA witness Greg LeMond:

Geoghegan's statement read: "I apologise to Greg LeMond and his family for the distress I caused by my call.

"I also apologise to the arbitration panel and to Floyd Landis and his legal team for the distraction.

"I have been very angry about how unfair this whole proceeding is to Floyd, a great friend and a greater champion, and stupidly tried to take out my anger on Greg.

The CyclingNews posts the apology written by FFF Executive Director Michael Henson in response to the phone call made by former Landis manager Will Geoghegan:

In a letter to Cyclingnews, Michael Henson, Executive Director of the Floyd Fairness Fund, clarified the position. "In light of the news coverage of yesterday’s testimony at the Floyd Landis arbitration hearing, we are writing to clarify that Will Geoghegan, who served as Floyd’s business manager until being fired yesterday, had no formal role with the FFF.

In addition to this, it was also discussed at today's session of the Landis hearings that perhaps Mr. Geoghegan should be compelled to return to testify since he was not present at the arbitration hearing today:

At the end of the morning session, one of USADA's lawyers, Mr. Barnett, asked the panel if Mr. Geoghegan would be indeed returning to testify, as he was about to take the stand when Mr. Suh asked for a break so that Mr. Geoghegan could consult legal counsel. Mr. Barnett implied that the absence of Mr. Geoghegan from the proceedings today indicated that the Landis side was "trying to hide Mr. Geoghegan."

The panel responded that they have no authority to compel Mr. Geoghegan to appear and testify, as would be the case in a civil or criminal court. Mr. Suh responded to this, saying, "As the panel well knows, there were issues brought up by Mr. LeMond which made it entirely appropriate for him to have legal counsel. We took a break yesterday so that Mr. Geoghegan could consult legal counsel."

The Black Star News in an editorial, states that Floyd Landis is a despicable human being.

PE.Com publishes Will Geoghegan's apology for the phone call he made to Greg LeMond the night before LeMond's testimony at yesterday's Landis hearings.

VeloNews has Oscar Pereiro, last year's Tour de France runner-up and presumptive champion depending on the outcome of the Landis hearings, still insisting that he will leave cycling rather than submit to DNA testing in the OP investigation:

"I'm disgusted at this pathetic journalism that some practice, that they repeat rumors to promote a lie," Pereiro said. "Someone says that Urko is a mythological dog from Galicia, when in reality the name of this animal is written with a ‘c' - Urco. Urko with a ‘k' is a hill in the Basque Country."

Blogs
Rant has the first update from today's testimony at the Landis hearings. It involves the cross examinations of Dr. Christiane Ayotte and Dr. Corinne Buisson and concerns among other things, the training of the previous two employees of the LNDD who were interviewed earlier this week. In his second update this afternoon Rant tells us that he thinks Dr Ayotte has made USADA's case more difficult:

. This time, she’s said something that sounds like it’s shot a major hole in the USADA case:

q: this is to make sure you identify the T and E?
a: for some tests, T or progesteron, that is possible; for E, which is small I have not often seen a lab that can meet the criteria for the E. there’s a limit to the identification and quantification.

q: EX 24, USADA ,

[ deceaurriz and mongongu do not look happy on he video feed. ]

I think Dr. Ayotte just said that for such a low epitestosterone reading, it’s very difficult to actually identify and quantify the amount of epitestosterone correctly. I may be wrong on that, but this exchange seems to be heading in that direction

In Rant's last update of the day he outlines the testimony of Joe Papp, who made a deal with USADA to tell his story of testosterone use, and Dr. Bruce Goldberger who was the first witness to testify for Landis.

ElTrav.com thinks we need only look into Floyd Landis' eyes to know he "juiced".

Independent Freewheeling Chicks thinks that to drink and dial is the height of stupidity, and who does that anyway in the age of caller ID?

Blessed Endurance feels that cycling is now sporting porn, all artifice and no real substance. He also thinks that Joe Papp was an effective witness for USADA against Floyd Landis.

For the Love of Sports wonder why Americans care about the Floyd Landis controversy since it's only cycling, and he thinks it's because Americans LOVE scandal.

Tim's Thoughtful Spot thinks that the Landis hearings started out with a certain degree of sanity, which has now been lost.

Hey Norton says that if you like the OC you will love cycling's latest soap opera, yesterday's Greg Lemond testimony at the Landis hearings.

GFisk.com thinks that you couldn't script yesterday's events at at the Landis hearing if you tried.

The Michigan Daily doesn't get why Greg LeMond chose Pepperdine Law school. and the Landis hearings to confess his abuse as a child.

Lin_M thinks that not only is Floyd Landis guilty, but that he makes Tonya Harding look classy. That does seem harsh.

Full Post with Comments...

Sunday Roundup

News
The Gainesville Sun interviews Professor Bruce Goldberger who testified at the Landis vs USADA hearings in May and is more than vocal in his criticism of the lab which determined that Landis had exogenous testosterone in his urine sample collected after Stage 17 of the 2006 Tour de France. Goldberger has remained silent since the end of the hearings, but feels now is the time to make some noise and states that the French scientists' work at the LNDD was "inexcusable" and "garbage.". Still, he will likely not be involved in the CAS appeal:

Landis has decided to appeal his case to the Court of Arbitration for Sports, the world's top sports court in the Swiss city of Lausanne. Goldberger, who probably won't be involved in the appeal because it concerns the second test, said he definitely thinks Landis should take the time and expense to make the appeal. That said, Landis' reputation has already been sullied beyond repair, Goldberger said.
"In this case, bad science has ruined the career of Floyd Landis," he said. "The damage has been done."

The CyclingNews has more today from a published interview with former T-Mobile rider Patrik Sinkewitz who gives details of his career as a PED using cyclist. The VeloNews covers the same story.

The San Francisco Chronicle's Scott Ostler tells Martina Hingis that she's a baby for not fighting substance abuse allegations, but then says Floyd Landis is weasely for declaring his innocence loudly and fighting on. Huh?

The Boston Globe reviews "Steroid Nation" a book about PEDs in and out of professional sports, in which Floyd Landis makes what is probably an inevitable appearance.

Mike Lupica of the Daily News, in a piece largely about Isiah Thomas in denial, thinks Martina Hingis sounded just like Floyd Landis did at first in trying to make excuses for herself and her positive test for cocaine.


Blogs
LumgoweeLand hates cheating and thinks we, as Americans, are better than that. The Floyd Landis scandal made him feel embarrassed to be from this country.

Velo Swiss had a late night with LSU, but takes some training advice from Floyd Landis to heart.

Thought for the Day

It isn't necessary to imagine the world ending in fire or ice. There are two other possibilities: one is paperwork, and the other is nostalgia.

--Frank Zappa--

Full Post with Comments...

Two Years and 1321 Posts Later....

This marks two years of posting here at TBV.

Our first post tried to separate known facts from misstatements and speculation, which we've been trying to do ever since.

Much has happened, yet many questions remain unanswered. Here's a few of the things that have come up.

1. Did Landis, in fact, dope with testosterone? USADA got a CAS decision to sanction for it, but some remain unconvinced.
2. Is presumption-of-doping, multiple burden-flip arbitration a reasonable system for finding the truth? Do we want the truth, or are we willing to settle for a "result"?
3. Does a quasi-judicial system with a closed pool of participants that rotate from advocates of one side to arbitrators of cases from case to case have inherent conflicts of interest? (Rephrased for "snake" in comments: Is it right to have judges prosecute some cases, and prosecutors judge others? Doesn't that offer opportunities for mutual "back-scratching"?)
   
4. Why is sports arbitration so "special" that it needs a small, closed pool to adjudicate?
   
5. Is strict-liability for athletes and no-liability for agencies a good system for establishing trust?
6. Why, really, did USADA fight so hard to keep Landis from getting a copy of a CD-ROM with the actual test data? The fear of tampering suggested in briefs was, and remains specious.
   
7. Why did people with no institutional reason to support Landis -- Paul Scott, John Amory, Bruce Goldberger -- burn bridges at personal cost to help defend him?
8. Is it -- was it -- possible to compete at the highest levels of cycling while clean, using tactics and audacity?
9. Will Landis be able and want to compete professionally again at a high level?
   

When you look inside yourself, do you see your heart as black or light?
(Painting: Rene Magritte)

Full Post with Comments...

Winnowing Words - Introduction

When we decided to roll up the tent at the end of the month, we thought it would be good to have some final thoughts on the matter, and not just from us.

To that end, we've contacted a number of people from all sides of the discussion, and asked them if they had anything they'd like to say. Some said yes, some said no, some hoped to participate but found they could not, and some didn't answer in time for us to include. We regret the submissions fall towards one side of the debate. We did try to send a balanced set of invitations, but response is beyond our control.

In order to entice those who didn't want to make too big a commitment, we suggested "a few paragraphs" of perhaps 500 words, and if struggling for particular topics, we offered as suggestions:

• Merits of the Landis case;
• Conduct of the Landis case;
• Coverage and discussion of the case;
• Wisdom, merit and effectiveness of anti-doping as currently practiced
• What could be done in anti-doping that might work better
  

Some people took these are marching orders, and others just wrote what they felt they wanted to address.

We're going to roll them out a few a day until the end of the year, when we hit the big red button. We hope you find them interesting -- we did.

• Howard Jacobs
• Larry
• Dirt Roadie
• One Mint Julich
• Race Junkie
• Christiane Ayotte
• WADAwatch
• Carlton Reid
• Klaas Faber
• Duckstrap
• John Gilliland
• Rational Head
• Maurice Suh and Daniel Weiss
• John Amory
• Spinopsys Phil
• Bruce Goldberger
• Arnie Baker
• Joe Papp
• Dan Rosen
• Wolfram Meier-Augenstein, part I.
  
• Wolfram Meier-Augenstein, part II.
  

Full Post with Comments...

French Press: Morning coffee and news from Paris, Saturday

A new story from Agence France Presse, picked up by Le Parisien (part of the ASO-l'Equipe group) and by FranceInfo. Also, a serious candidate for snark of the week in the weekend magazine of l'Equipe. From AFP:

The Landis Case: a witness speaks about doping, experts disagree
(c) AFP – Gabriel Bouys

American Joe Papp, a professional cyclist turned doping witness, stated Friday in the case of Floyd Landis (who is being tried for doping during his victorious 2006 Tour de France) that he evaded drug tests despite taking testosterone, the product implicated in his compatriot's case.

Apart from this personal testiony, the "Landis case" (Landis is fighting to avoid two years' suspension and the loss of his TDF title) focussed on a long distance battle between two experts regarding reading the results of Landis' analyses as carried out by the LNDD.

The director of the antidoping laboratory in Montreal, Christiane Ayotte, who had begun her testimony the day before, after the "bomb" dropped by Greg LeMond about attempts by someone close to Landis to intimidate him, confirmed that taking "an overall reading, everything is consistent." "Everything goes together," she indicated, snapping back at Landis' attorney's questions. She explained clearly that the errors noticed in the work of technicians at the LNDD had had no consequences for the results of the whole set of analyses, which showed the presence of exogenous testosterone.

"I cannot believe these results. I have never seen so many errors in a single sample," replied Bruce Goldberger, professor at the University of Florida, while pointing out numerous approximations in the tables and other diagrams furnished by the LNDD.

In between these two experts--who did nothing more than confirm both sides in their reciprocal certainties--Joe Papp, a journeyman professional cyclist, spoke of his personal experience with doping. "Two times out of two," Papp (who was suspended for two years for a positive test in May 2006) told of passing through the (anti-doping) net despite having taken Androgel, a form of testosterone applied to the chest just before turning up for the anti-doping tests.

The witness explained that using microdoses allowed "using doping agents in large enough quantities to get their benefit, without getting a positive test result."

"It (testosterone) is important in stage races because they are won by the guy who recovers best and who is the closest possible to his highest performance level every day," Papp added, admitting that "lots of racers" doped by trying to remain close to the legal limits without going beyond them. "It's in the culture of this sport," he added, stating that he began taking EPO (erythropoietin) in 2001, before moving on to testosterone in 2004.

He also more or less directly implicated the Italian team "Whistle Power" (for which he raced in 2006) by stating that the brother of the team's director provided him with EPO, growth hormones, steroids and insulin in the context of a collective doping program.

Before the hearing began, Will Geoghegan (friend and former representative of Landis), who had intimidated Greg LeMond Wednesday, on the eve of his testimony, with an old story of sexual abuse, made his "apologies" to everyone.

The snark of the week candidate is in the form of a full-page, 6-panel cartoon in l'Equipe's magazine. The cartoon shows an athlete (evidently) wearing a yellow tie appearing before a 3-person panel seated behind a desk. The cartoon is titled "Punk Floyd."

Panel 1. First official: "The A-sample of your specimen having displayed an abnormally elevated level of ARF [note at bottom of page: A.R.F. Albinonine raffinée fonebonoïde], you demanded the B-sample be tested."
Second official: "Which was also positive."
Panel 2. First official: "On the pretext of a half-erased label, you had the procedure cancelled. It then started again with immaculate labels."
Second official: "Results: positive."
Panel 3. First official: "You said the lab technician had not washed his hands before the analysis. Because of this doubt, the matter was begun again from the beginning. And the specimens remained positive."
Panel 4. First official: "You called into question the legitimacy of the laboratory at Chateau-Binoni to conduct these expert analyses. The specimens were sent to three other labs."
Second official: "The ARF levels did not budge."
Panel 5. First official: "You demanded to see the diplomas of each one of the experts. In a word, you used every recourse possible to delay your appearance before this commission."
Athlete ". . ." [Conventionally means "does not know what to reply."]
Panel 6. First official: "But today, here you are. We can begin."
Athlete: "Objection! It's time for the lunch recess."

Full Post with Comments...

Hearing - Friday Goldberger

Because of scheduling issues, we're getting Landis witness Dr. Bruce Goldberger.

Dr. Goldberger is a Professor and Director of Toxicology in the Department of Pathology, Immunology and Laboratory Medicine in the College of Medicine at the University of Florida in Gainesville.

DIRECT BY JACOBS

q: qualifications.
a: ...Forensic toxicology.

q: experience in anti-doping.
a: ... Univ Florida professor of toxicology...

[more]


q: what do you do on a day to day basis.
a: director of a forensic laboratory, blood urine, tissue samples,...

q: do you use gc and gcms?
a: every day?

q: relevant certifications.
a: diplomate of american ... toxicologists.

q:
a: president of american society of forensic science in coloroado springs.

q: other?
a: helped draft the nccls.

q: what is the nccls?
a: national clinical chemistry laboratory standard.

SUH: Papp is talking to the press. I thought we were under a gag?

BRUNET: parties, not witnesses...

q: work with Dr. Bowers.
a: he was the chair.

q: journals
a: editor of the journal of forensic toxicology.

q: how many times have you testified in court?
a: 120-135 times.

q: what in?
a: state's witness in dui and other cases.

q: any other consultiong?
a: consultant to the NFLPA, since November 2006.

q: what on?
a: drug testing issues.

q: consulting business?
a: yes, allowing me to work on case.

q: have been a lab inspector.
a: yes, for the National Lab inspection, for drugs, and oncologists.

q: what did you look for?
a: most were for the national lab... chain of custody, assay quality, qualifications of people, very comprehensive, 6 months on all certified labs.

q: how long?
a: about 10 years. It takes about 3 days, can't do it now.

[ he's very qualified, I'll skip. ]

q: do you remember when you were retained here?
a: about 3-4 months ago.

q: you have an agreement, rate?
a: $300/hr.

q: time
a: 20-30 hours.

q: you were given documents?
a: yes.

q: you were given lab documents?
a: yes. large stack of 1500 pages.

q: what else?
a: WADA ISLs and a number of others.

q: general issues first. Why is lab documentatoin important.
a: the material we go through on a daily basis. I have no idea what I did yesterday a year ago, a year from now. everything is documented and retained.

q: when you were an inspector, how did you look at errors?
a: story, before we go to a laboratory, we get a data package. As an inspector, you get a feeling about what you are walking into. So those documents are very important to the inspector.

q: in your review of the documentatino here, did you notice errors that caused concern?
a: I was reluctant to become involved. I looked at some documents, late, and after my review, I saw glaring issues with how chemistry was performed, and signed on.

q: did you also notice mislabelling and documentation.
a: yes. forensic correction policy; there should be no obliteration, so it can be read in the future.

q: why?
a: because we're human and make mistakes.

[Ayotte looks Pained.]

q: let's look at some of these forensic corrections. USADA 008.
a: good example. it's not readable.

q: it may be a scanning error, but it's what we got.

[ Ayotte is working her gum hard. ]

q: you understand the sample number?
a: yes.

q: you see this other entry?
a: you can't see it on the screen.

q: so we have a misnumbering wasn't even numbering.
a: it's a fatal flaw, how do we know we have the right sample?

q: cause you concern?
a: tremendous. when I look at testing, it's the first thing I look at and it's incorrect.

q: there are a number of other pages with crossed out forensic corrections, right?
a: yes.

q: USADA 200, I counted 6.
a: theres one on column 1 3 lines down.

[ Floyd is enjoying this. ]

q: seing a page like this without any notations, concern?
a: yes. it's a consistent pattern. I had an employee with a 4 that started as a two; I counselled her to do an initialled strikeout.

q: if the response is how does that affect the results?
a: it might, we might not. Its the building of problems in the package that concerns me.

q: there are other pages?
a: more than several.

q: what effect did the totality of these corrections give you on the reliability of these results.
a: it's unreliable.

q: why?
a: it's your documentation. What I said about inspecting, the documents tell you the care.

q: what is a proper chain of custody?
a: start with collection through displosal. Include all transfers, all steps, every time handled by a human it should be documented.

q: what is the significance if there is an omission?
a: terrible. demonstrates lack of attention to documentatoin. I've seen it that the Coc is completed retrospectively, filling out forms in the afternoon after doing the work. That's wrong. You need to know exactly where it's at at any particular time.

q: did this document reveal CoC issues?
a: yes.

q: what about lab transfers. Is that something that is required for good lab practice?
a: yes. everything should be recored.

q: location at all times?
a: yes.

[ ayotte looks resigned ]

q: specific gcms issues starting with identification of E and T. Describe proper identification techniques.
a: involves retention time and mass spec criteria, the latter has full scan mode, need lots of ions; other is selected ion monitor, as done here. Typical process is 3 unique ions, with plotting using ion rations.

q: that is what WADA technical document requires?
a: yes, it says you must have three ions, and they must be analysed and evaluated, not thrown out the window.

q: anything unique about steroids?
a: no. the application of MS is just like the use for Cocaine and its metabolites.

q: on the confirmation analysis, did you review to see if it showed LNDD acquired and evalated three ions?
a: they acquired more, but their evaluation of the data has the display of a single ion 432.

q: lets look at USADA 0093. You understand this is the chromatogram for one of the A confirmations.
a: yes.

q: how many ions does it show?
a: one, 432.

q: the documentation shows they acquired others.
a: because they're operating in low resolution mode, they are acquiring 432 to 433, which may be responsible by the baseline problems in this chromatogram. So they are operating in low res mode, so it's not typical practice. That's why it's noisier than the beautiful chromatogram from Montreal.

q: USADA 86. what is shown here.
a: The calibration data for E and T, shows they evaluated one ion; they need more because it can effect the quantification.

q: USADA 0083, in their brief, said that they acquired the required 3 ions, and this page is proof.
a: yes. I don't know for sure, but there's no demonstration; there's only the printout. But the proof is in the paper, and we don't see the analysis.

q: Second A, USADA 213, this shows single ion, correct?
a: yes, same low res scale.

q: B confirmation, anything different there. USADA 277. same thing?
a: yes, this looks worse though.

q: how?
a: the chromatography is horrible.

q: get up and show if you like.

[ he gets up ]

q: what page are you holding?
a: USADA 278 which is the quantification of the E-T

gets technical.

a: I'd display all three ions at the same time to see co-elution. I'm more concerned with this Epi, admitting it is low. The chemstation has drawn integration marks.

a: I'd never do a manual integration.

q: given the issues you describe, do you have any confidence this is properly identifying E?
a: no. gives lots of reasons. This is bad chromatography. We looked at the montreal data, so we know it can be done.

q: they ran 3 of these in the B sample, right?
a: yes.

q: let's look, USADA 280. single ion?
a: yes.

q: any issues?
a: E looks the same, T peak has end peak is not strong.

q: any confidence properly identified?
a: no.

q: are there other substance that would share the 432 ion?
a: yes, I looked on my computer and got over 10 compound, and some steroid related, some not.

technical stuff.

q: which is why you need to look at more than a single peak.
a: yes. we don't know if we have T or T and some unknown compound.

q: USADA 282, single ion, any issues?
a: looks like the last one. Problems with E and T the way it's integrated.

q: based on this chromatogram, is the identication acceptable?
a: no.

q: what is the significance of the fact that LNDD did not provide the chromatograms of the ions collected?
a: they have not documented the T/E result they are claiming.

q: if you haven't adequately identified T and E you can't go forward with your analysis?
a: correct. Where cases can end up in litigation of arbitration, we have to be supportable. Minimum of 3. I know of no lab reporting quantification on a single ion in a setting like this.

q: do other wada labs give different documentation?
a: yes.

q: describe.
a: UCLA gives selected ion and full scan, the best of both worlds.

GC 524

q: is this the UCLA chromatogram?
a: yes, it has the internal standards on top, upper left; single ion; I prefer two minimum. T is in the panel below, showing 432, 433 and 209.

q: lnds does something different what is the effect?
a: don't know, we haven't studied they acquired 432 and 433 together, I don't know what that will do.

q: and UCLA shows all?
a: yes.

q: have you authored papers on this need to acquire analyse many ions?
a: yes, for years we struggle with the use of selected ion monitoring in forensic toxicology. We were comfortable, one of the first was the one was by Dr. Bowers.

Entered at GDC 58.1

q: this specifically addresses the need for three diagnostic ions.
a: yes.

others.

q: when you hire new people at your lab, what training do you provide?
a: it takes months or a year or two to get them competent. we cross train everyone. one thing they understand is chromatography. the ones from my lab are all classic, and if they are not, I'll send them back.

q: do they all go through a standardized training?
a: somewhat, but much is cookbook, but it takes a good amount of time.

q: continuing training?
a: do continuing education, weekly monthly meeting to bring them up to date, they go to conferences and meetings every year.

q: why?
a: otherwise their knowledge of the field becomes stagnant. To keep my diplomate, I need to go through continuing education.

q: Matrisx interference. what is it?
a: the chromatograms you saw before are matrix interference.

q: Any of them 272, 282.
a: yes.

q: what are the possible causes?
a: other steroids, other compounds, unknowns. that's what worries me. even doing a simple confirmation, we get them. Then we need to send them somewhere else that doesn't have it.

q: impact on identification?
a: faulty and incorrect quantification.

q: EX 24 USADA 100, control urine on A. looking a tthe peak at 19.33, what issues?
a: what's going on there? there is a shoulder. we may have co-eluting peaks, or injection ports wrong, ...

q: effect of coeluting peak on a control.
a: the quantification of the sample would be wrong.

q: USADA 93, athlete sample, internal standard chromatogram. Issues?
a: have a resolution problem. co-eluting at 21.1, not baseline separated. Looks like a 20%, 10% might be OK, but not 20%.

q: USADA 92 says the retention time is 20.98 what is the impact of this interfenc on an interla standard.
a: the target response would be incorrect, so ultimately the quantitation would not be correct. We can only guess where the peak starts and stops. The computer has done an estimate, and we need to rely on it.

q: Another A cong, USADA 213, internal standard. problem:
a: looks like an injection port problem... doesn't look like overload, something different.

q: affect of overload?
a: wrong quantitations.

q: USADA 93, LNDD 34. one is blown up. look at the E peak. issues?
a: we don't know where the integration started and stopped. sometimes we zoom, and get a wavering baseline, but shows a chromatographic problem.

q: what is the effect on the reliability of the quantification?
a: it would be unreliable, assuming it was the right stuff -- single ion.

q: USADA 277, any E peak issues?
a: same as before, except its worse. Leading baseline is higher. very uncertain about the baseline. multiple peaks mergine.

q: can you demonstrate on the screen what else might be coming in here?

example showing how drawing starts affects, and need for documentation.

q: USADA 280. any problems?
a: essentially the same. see both lines on the 18.57 peak. so it's not obliterated. I don't know if it's correct. I'd like to see the other ions, and we could identifying a co-eluting peak.

q: the blow up of the same peak, does it have any resolving power?
a: worst of the bunch. there are two or three co-eluting peaks before the epi-T peak.

q: illustrate?

a: since we don't have the other ions, we don't know where the E peak is. Might be here, here, or over here. don't know where to draw the baseline.

q: USADA 282, third replica of B conf. look at the E peak.
a: same problem, but baseline is wavering even more before and after than the other two, would be very unceratin about the baseline.

q: significance?
a: affects the area included in the quantification.

q: does the blow up help?
a: makes it worse. I don't know where the baseline is. on this one, if you go to the previous, wider view, you see the baseline is very noisy, much too high and would affect the ability to measure the E. It's only about 3X noise, making it near the Labs limit of detection. The data from UCLA and Montreal shows it can be done. This is obviously a problem.

q: what is the result of this bad chromatography on the TE results here?
a: no. It makes you question why this was sent to irms. There were problems with the screen too.

q: just to be clear, you are not offering opinions on the irms?
a: no, I am not.

q: this is represented as a reinjection with one standard, but you can see they are reporting Ad-4p, with a chormatogram.
a: this is funny. when you don't get multiple ions, the software is not smart enough to differnetiate from internal standards. It was told to look for a peak, and it found one.

q: good reason to qcuire and look at three ions?
a: yes.

q: do you have any confidence in this testing?
a: none at all?

q: in all of your 20+ years in the field, have you ever seen so many errors on a single sample.
q: No.

NO QUESTIONS.

---

[ Young is doing cross because Dunn isn't here, and Barnett might break some dishes. ]

YOUNG CROSS.

q: your CV. steroid mentioned only once?
a: correct.

q: of the 3000 a year, how many are uring.
a: almost all, 2700.

q: of those 2700 did you analyse for T or E?
a: very few. we send them to a reference lab?

q: you don't do that?
a: no.

q: cookbook toxicology?
a: SOP, very simple.

q: accreditations of your lab?

q: when you have a cocaine case, or an alcohol do you provide a documentation package?
a: yes, we call it a litigation file.

q: any EDFs?
a: no one has asked, but if they did for a test within the last 10 years, I could give it to them.

q: how many T/E's have you looked at?
a: I've just been solicited to apply for the job of director at the UCLA Olympic lab.

q: if I took you through the various standards...
a: yes, but there was no QC data in the packet.

q: you lab is accredited by the american colleged of pharmacology.
a: yes.

q: not ISO?
a: no need yet.

q: better?
a: not really?

q: the ISO standards are for the WADA labs,
a: yes.

q: so you haven't worked under ISO?
a: no.

q: you talked about two specific documents, USADA 200, with a number of non-forensic corrections.
a: yes.

q: deal with E and T
a: yes.

q: then USADA 008, and pointed to the fact that the sample was wrong.
a: yes.

q: and you see it has a problem with derivitiaztion, but you know it's the right sample.
a: don't know.

q: but this printout is the right number.
a: it is, yes.

q: so you confusiton is not the files generated by the instrument.
a: it's the symptom of a problem, like high blood pressure.

q: The applicable rules to a WADA laboratory are the technical documents?
a: yes.

q: EX 116(?) these are the 2006 forensic toxicology recc of SOF.
a: yes.

q: take a look at page 8.
a: ok.

q: The coc requirements are in section 7.2, right?
a: yes.

q: 7.2.5 all it says is that any transfer must be documented as part of the permanent lab record.
A: agree.

q: 7.2.6 coc for sample; separate bottle coc and aliquot coc?
a: depends on the lab. Can have cominations....

SUH: cut him off.

q: 7.2.6 it is reccomended that coc reflect...
a: correct.

q: the document your group has written is a reccomendation.
a: it's a guideline, not a basis for inspection.

q: the standard for LNDD is the ISL?
a: yes.

JACOBS:

q: the lab errors you mentioned you take as symptoms of sloppy work.
a: yes.

q: USADA 277, on the E and T peaks, you were not suggesting they could be confused,, you were saying this peak might be confuesd with this or this or anything in this whole area?
a: correct.

q: poor chromatography goes to accuracy of results?
a: yes.

q: affected by accreditation?
a: no.

NO QUESTIONS

SUSPENEDE D until 9:30 AM SATURDAY

Full Post with Comments...

Professional Seminar on the Case

We learn from an emailer of a seminar by the International Association of Forensic Sciences:

Tuesday, July 22, 2008 Time: 7:00 a.m. - 8:30 a.m.

#1 Bad Science: The Floyd Landis Case

Bruce A. Goldberger, PhD University of Florida Department of Pathology College of Medicine Gainesville, FL

Robert D. Blackledge, MS Retired Forensic Chemist El Cajon, CA

Floyd Landis, a professional bicycle racer from Murrieta, California, won the 2006 Tour de France. However, not many days after the race’s conclusion, the Laboratoire National de Dépistage du Dopage (LNDD) “announced” (actually the information was leaked to the press) that a urine sample obtained from Floyd after stage 17 had been found to be positive for a form of synthetic testosterone. If this finding were to be upheld, Landis would be stripped of his title and also banned from participation in the sport.

Landis denied any sports doping and his strategy in fighting these charges has been to try to generate public support and to make all of the documentation of the LNDD tests available to the public. GC/MS is used by LNDD for preliminary sample screening, and carbon stable isotope ratio mass spectrometry is used for final confirmation.

From the standpoint of a forensic analytical chemist with experience in forensic laboratory accreditation standards, this presentation will examine the analytical data and correspondence from the Landis case in terms of chain of custody requirements, World Anti-Doping Association (WADA) guidelines and LNDD SOP, and reasonable standards of good laboratory practice.

Full Post with Comments...

Glossary, Roster and TLA decoder ring

Started by Carlton Reid at bikebiz.uk, with permission.

AAF Adverse Analytical Finding - a "positive" or "failed" doping test.

ADRB Anti-Doping Review Board.

ADRV Anti-Doping Rule Violation - a case handled through results management by an Anti-doping Organization. Many AAF's may be folded into a single ADRV.

AFLD, French Anti-doping Agency, as of Oct 1 2006, parent of LNDD.

AFO, Athlete Fairness Organization, proposed by Landis to address shortcomings in the anti-doping enforcement process.

AIGCP Associazione Internazionale Gruppi Sportivi Professionistici/International Association of Professional Cycling teams

AIMEC, Italian Association of Cycling Medics.

Aguilera, Dr. Rodrigo; House Ear Institute, Proteomics Core Facility, Los Angeles. Author of key papers on CIR applied to doping control; present at the B-sample retesting in April 2007.

Amory, Dr. John Witness for Landis at hearing, expert on testosterone.

Amstel Light, alleged beer consumed by Landis after Stage 16.

Andreu, Frankie; former American cyclist, member of Postal Team. Recently admitted to EPO use in 90s. Compelled to testify against Armstrong in a case that settled with Armstrong winning.

Armstrong, Lance; American 7-time TdF Champion, target of many doping accusations and suspicions by L'Equipe and Mr. Pound. Aggressively defends his reputation.

ASO Amaury Sport Organisation, owner of the Tour de France and L'Equipe newspaper. Does not own LNDD, but seems to have close unofficial connections.

AAA American Arbitration Association, under whose rules the USADA hearings are run.

Ayotte, Christiane; Head of the Montreal WADA lab, testified at the hearing. "OK for me"

Baker, Arnie; San Diego cycling coach who works with Landis.

Barnett, Matthew; Associate outside counsel for USADA in the Landis trial. Known for his aggressiveness and presentation of the "Dancing Monkey" in that trial. Originally given the handle "condescending man" by Hue; also the author of the USADA discovery letter that asked for contributor information.

Blood Profiling; A proposed technique for detecting doping. An agency would keep historical values for an athlete, to be compared against current testing. Variances that do not seem to be of natural origin would be suspicious.

Bordry, Pierre; head of the French anti-Doping Agency (AFLD) that funds LNDD. Filed the Police complaint about the "hacker".

Botre, Dr. Francesco; Director of the Rome WADA Laboratory, "Independant" expert for the Panel at the Landis AAA hearing; present for the "reprocessing" done at the LNDD. Author of a paper relevant to the case about considering uncertainty in doping measurements, cited in the Landis closing statement.

Bowers, Dr. Larry; Expert in CIR, directly helped USADA during the hearing. Author of several important papers; alleged to have tried blocking Landis access to log files from LNDD.

Brenna,J Thomas, Ph.D; USADA witness on IRMS analysis. Also called the 1.3 million dollar man, for the amount of money he received in grant funds from USADA during the 4 years prior to his testimony. Testified early in the hearing, then next to last in rebuttal.

Brunet, Patrice; Canadian Immigration Lawyer and Arbitrator. When Campbell and McLaren could not agree on a third arbitrator, he was chosen as Chair of the Landis CAS-AAA Arbitration Panel by each of the other two ranking/striking the other arbitrators on the list until a common name, his, ranked at the top of each list.

Bruyneel, Johan; Postal/Discovery DS.

Buisson, Corrine, LNDD supervisor of Mongongu and Frelat, testified at the hearing.

Call, The; made by Geoghegan to Lemond on May 16th during the hearing.

Campbell, Christopher; Athlete's Panel member in the CAS-AAA arbitrator pool. Ex olmpic freestyle wrestler and oldest athlete ever to win an Olympic medal in that sport. Wrote a dissenting opinion in the tyler Hamilton case.Member of the Panel in the Landis case.

CAS Court of Arbitration for Sport

CAS-AAA; Court of Sport Arbitration, American Arbitration Association, the body that adjudicates disciplinary proceedings involving USADA and an American Athlete.

Catlin, Don; Former head of the WADA lab at UCLA for 20+ years.

CIR, Carbon Isotope Ratio. By tecting how much Carbon-12 vs. Carbon-13 are in something, you can tell something of it's origins. Human-produced t(endogenous) estosterone is different than that derived from plants and administered (exogenous). The CIR is measured by using IRMS.

Davis, Simon; IRMS technical expert for Landis at hearing,

de Ceaurriz, Jacques; Director of the LNDD, pronounced the CIR was, "infallible"

CIR Carbon Isotope Ratio test, a test for exogenous testosterone ie synthetic man-juice; also IRMS CIR

Cleopatra, Queen of da Nile. I'm guessing some people won't get it.

Cofidis cycling team, on trial in France in the wake of the David Millar doping case.

Confirmation Test; a test done after screening to obtain a more definitive result.

CPA Professional Riders' Association, which is not a labor union, more of a professional association. Has no power. TUU? Totally Useless Union? Headed by Francesco Moser.

Dancing Monkey; A technique lawyers use to distract the finder of fact from the relevant aspect of the case.

Darling Trial Courtroom; Site at Pepperdine University Law School where the USADA disciplinary proceeding again Floyd Landis took place.

DNA Testing; A method of identifying who belongs to some biological sample. Often used to place people at crime scenes. Presented as infallible, but failed to convince OJ Simpson jury. Defense attorneys don't like clients to take them for fear of false positive. There is talk of requiring ProTour riders to provide DNA samples as a condition of license.

DPF Daily Peleton forum, the BBS chosen by FL to talk science, beer, TLAs and choice of uphill mind music. Posted tirade about Lemond at DPF was cited by USADA at the hearing as a threat.

DS; Director Sportif, the manager/head coach of a cycling team.

EFTMID, "Everyone Faster Than Me is Doping", a frequently heard complaint that must be taken with a grain of salt.

Endogenous; stuff your body makes by itself.

ERC Endogenous reference compound. A natural hormone that is used as reference to compare to.

Excreted; waste products are excreted into urine.

Exogenous; stuff your body didn't make, from the outside

Ferrari, Michele; Italian doctor/sports physiologist. Worked with Armstrong. Major proponent of watt/kg efficiency measurement. Also rumoured doping guru called "Doctor Evil."

Ferret, name given an anonymous source of some documents; turned out to be Landis.

FFF, Floyd Fairness Fund, announced defense fund for the Landis case. No contact information at this time.

FL , Floyd Landis

Frelat,Claire; LNDD lab technician, who tested the Landis "B" samples after six months of training.

Fuentes, Eufemiano; Spanish doctor implicated in Operacion Puerto. Had 200 bags of blood in his refrigerator, but we haven't found out whose they were, with athletes refusing DNA tests.

GC/MS, Gas Chromatogaphy/Mass Spectrometry, also used for doping tests that are not CIR, in particular, "quantitative" T/E tests.

Geohegan, Will; Landis' manager and long time friend. 'Will' @ DPF and the maker of a telephone call to Greg Lemond the night before his testimony that may have turned the result of the hearing from science to scandel. The stuff Tabloids are made of. Rhymes with "Reagan".

Goldberger, Dr. Bruce, Forensic Lab expert, testified for Landis at the hearing; invited to apply for Catlin's job at UCLA.

GT Grand Tour: Tour De France, Giro d'Italia, Vuela etc.

G&T Gin and tonic. FL prefers 'Jack'

Hamilton, Tyler; American cyclist now off two year suspension for blood doping; former teammate of Landis and Armstrong.

Health Check; Not-a-doping blood test done by UCI "vampires" on the mornings of stages to ensure hematocrit less than 50%. Failure results in a 2 week "health break".

Hearing, The, Landis' public AAA-CAS hearing held at Pepperding Univ, May 14-23 2007.

Hematocrit; amount of red blood cells in.

Hatton, Carolyn; UCLA WADA lab representative that aided USADA attorneys throughout the Landis hearing. In our hearing coverage, occasionally referred to as "Henson"; not all are fixed.

Hoisting on own's own petard; To cast blame for a complaint upon the acts of person making it. See also, Young Gambit.

IDCR, WADA technical document on identifying peaks in chromatography.

ISL, International Laboratory Standard, against which WADA accredits laboratories. (Also ILS, SIL)

IRMS Isotope Ratio Mass Spectrometry test, how a CIR is typically measured.

IV; Intravenous fluid replacement, either saline solution or saline + glucose.

Jack Daniels, Tennesee sipping whisky, drunk by Landis on the eve of Stage 17 along with some Amstel Light to wash away the bitterness of S16.

Jacobs, Howard; attorney representing Landis, formerly represented Hamilton and others.

Lamour, Jean-Francois, French sports minister, now also WADA vice-chair and Mr. Pound's heir-apparent. Irate at revelations in spring 2007 that he'd tested positive once, cleared by a different lab; and a second time for something not then a prohibited substance.

Landis, Floyd; 2006 TdF Winner, our protagonist.

Lelangue, John; Phonak DS during 2006 TdF.

Lefevere, Patrick; Quick Step Manager, also AIGCP President and UPTC member.

Le Figaro, French newspaper of conservative leaning, perhaps similar to the Washington Times.

Lemond, Greg; American 3-time TdF champion, very critical of doping in cycling. Testified to a conversation he had with Landis partly concerning Landis' alleged use of testosterone during the 2006 tour de France.

Le Monde, major French newspaper, considered the "newspaper of record" similar to the New York Times or the Washington Post.

L'Equipe, French newspaper centered on sports, owned by ASO. Has a somewhat tabloid and muckraking editorial interest that might be seen as counter to ASO's other business interests.

Lim, Allen; Exercise physiologist for CycleOps/Saris, works closely with Landis.

LDP Laboratory Documentation Pack (a 370-page LNDD vs FL document) defined in the ILS.

LNDD Laboratoire National de Dépistage du Dopage (the lab that tested both the A and B samples of Floyd Landis because UCI wanted tests done quickly)

McLaren, Richard; USADA's representative on the Landis CAS-AAA Arbitration Panel.Canadian Arbitrator and Legal Professor.

McQuaid, Pat; head of the UCI.

Meier-Augenstein,Wolfram, a/k/a Herr Doctor, Landis witness on issue of chromotography, co-elution, background noise etc. Critic of LNDD lab interpretation og Landis "data"

Metabolite; decomposition product of some other substance. If you can't detect the substance, you may be able to find the metabolites.

Mongongu, Cynthia; LNDD lab technician who tested the Landis "A" sample, supervised the testing, by Claire Frelat, of the "B" sample from Stage 17 of the 2006 TdF and the "additional "B" samples, including reprocessing of all samples.

Moser, Francesco; head of the CPA; ex-rider. Has controversially called for, "liberalizing doping under pro-riders".

MSM, "Mainstream Media", anything not part of the blogosphere. Things that kill trees, use radio waves, or are the web presence of those who do.

OLN Outdoor Life Network, carried TdF in US; changed name to "VS". Sometimes called the "Only Lance Network."

Omerta, the "code of silence", originally related to criminal activities and described as, the categorical prohibition of cooperation with state authorities or reliance on its services, even when one has been victim of a crime.” In context, applied to both the unwillingness of cyclists to talk about doping, and more recently the WADA code of "ethics" for labs and lab personnel.

OOC Out of Competition test

OP, Operaction Puerto, Spanish police investigation into doping. Many accused, so far zero convictions.

Papp,Joseph; Professional cyclist, determined to have violated anti-doping rules who testified at the Landis trial that the professional peloton dopes and that they know how to dope, using testosterone and other drugs, without getting caught by doping controls.

PED Performance Enhancing Drug

Pepperdine University; Location in Malibu, California where the Landis disciplinary hearing took place.

Post, The, Nov 28 post on DPF, quoted at TBV and used against Landis at the hearing.

Pound, Richard; Founding head of WADA; announced departure in Fall 2007, likely to be replaced by Lamour.

Proficiency Test; Quarterly test of a laboratory by WADA where they are given samples and required to identify presence or absence of what is in them. Described in the ISL.

ProTour; cycling series run by UCI; replaced the World Cup. UCI wants this to include the Grand Tours; the GT organizations do not want to be subsumed by the ProTour.

PT May mean either ProTour or Proficiency Test

Rihs, Andy; Phonak team owner, head of Phonak hearing systems; owns BMC cycles.

Riis, Bjarne; CSC Team owner and DS; 1997 TdF champion, and as of 5/2007, admitted EPO user during that win.

Ressiot, Damien; Top investigative reporter for L'Equipe. Broke the "hack" story favorably to LNDD, implicating Landis without revealing any evidence. Under indictment in France for publishing confidential information injurious to Cedric Vasseur, among others, in the Confidis case, including evidence fabricated by the Police. Put together the LNDD/Armstrong/EPO story by getting the research data and the codes from Zorzoli.

Roostered, term coined and picked up in DPF discussions, similar to FUBAR.

Saiz, Manolo; Owner of the ProTour license and contracts for some riders on the team once known as Astana-Wurth, then maybe Astana. This is a mess. He's been implicated in Puerto with Fuentes, but not charged. The team went on without him and secured new sponsorship, but he still seems to hold some rights and wants compensation or to run his own team. The innocent victim here is Vino.

Schanzer,Wilhelm,Ph.D. Director of Cologne WADA Lab, USADA witness in the Landis case, that appeared by telephone

Screening Test; a simple, cheap test used to determine if there is reason to do a more complicated confirmation test.

Shackelton, Dr. Cedric; USADA witness on steroid metabolism, author of key paper cited by everyone.

Snark, snide remark, often emitted by columnists, pundits and opinion makers when looking to score cheap points against an absent party. Also a boat, a thing hunted, and a primitive cruise missile. TBV is never snarky, and calls up others when they are. Uh huh.

Specialized Test; a test that is "specialized" beyond the normal set. These must be called out in AAF reports. Examples are the EPO test and the IRMS/CIR test.

Star Chamber, a legal or administrative body characterized by strict, aribitrary rulings and secretive proceedings. An metaphor for an historical and real Star Chamber, and a more recent film.

Suh, Maurice; Lead counsel for Floyd Landis in the Landis disciplinary hearing.

Supplimentary Procedures; The extra set of procedures used by a CAS-AAA Arbitration Panel in a disciplinary proceeding under the WADA Code.

T/E or TE Ratio of testosterone and epitestosterone

TBV Trust But Verify; you are here.

Trust but verify, the phrase.

TdF Tour de France

TFT That's !@#$ing Typical.

TH Tyler Hamilton

TLA Three Letter Acronym

TUE Therapeutic Use Exemption, apparently lots of pro roadies are asthmatics

UCI Union Cycliste Internationale

UPTC UCI ProTour Council

USADA US Anti-doping Agency, a tight-lipped, protocol-abiding organisation. Headed by Terry Madden. Chief dope cop is Travis Tygart.

USACycling, the American Cycling Federation. UCI referred the case to USACycling, which promptly delegated it to USADA. Headed by Steve Johnson.

Vaughters, Jonathon; Ex-cyclist, teammate at Postal. Runs Slipstream sports teams Involved in some of the current Andreu allegations/admissions.

Ventura, Robbie; Ex-cyclist now coach; Has worked with Landis, commented on 2006 Tour on OLN.

Vinokourav, Alexandre; Winner of the 2006 Vuelta, 34 year old Kazak rider on Astana was forced out of the 2006 tour because of teammates implicated in Puerto, but eventually cleared. In contract hell with Saiz. Formerly on T-Mobile. Known for crazy attacking style. A favorite in both ways in any race he is in.

VS; new name for OLN

Walking objection; Also known as the "talking objection", when used by a lawyer effectively, it instructs the witness what answer is expected under the guise of "objecting" to a question asked of the witness by the other party.

WADA World Anti-doping Agency

Witt, David; Landis' father-in-law.

Young Richard; Outside counsel and lead attorney for USADA in the Landis case. Also a member of the CAS Appeals Panel.

Young Gambit; The technique used by Young to blame Landis' attorney for any complaint they had about the proceedings. See also "Hoisting on own's own petard"

Young Ruse; The technique young used to introduce his own testimony through a leading and/or summarizing statement to which his witness answered "yes", thereby making Young's testimony evidence.

Z-Man; David Zabriskie.

Zabriskie, David; Rider for CSC, Landis' flatmate in Girona, Spain. Only American winner of stages at the Giro, Tour, and Vuelta.

Zorzoli, Dr. Mario; UCI Medical advisor, suspended for a month for having provided Armstrong's control forms to L'Equipe in the EPO testing affair of 2005, the only party to have received any discpline in that mess.

[end]

Full Post with Comments...