Monday, October 09, 2006

Monday Roundup

BikeBiz concisely summarizes recent events, gives plugs.
European CyclingPost poll 51.2% guilty, 48.7% innocent.
VeloNews mail complains about "Guilty until proven innocent".
CyclingNews late with USA Today story, misses forum.
AP picks up USA Today report, via WJRT. Then ESPN gets it.

Business Law Society takes a look at the case from a procedural standpoint. Fairly good summary, with a few clinkers in my reading.

Landis at Daily Peloton Forum last night after I crashed:

...First the UCI announced that there had been an adverse finding and a few hours later, when asked who it was, Mcquaid said "it's the worst case scenario" after which the press told us that they had called all of the federations and been told that it was none of them. Only USA cycling refused to return calls. Do you think they followed the rules?

...Thank you, I too have no problem with the french people, I found it to be a beautiful country. I never intended any of my comments to be directed at the french in general. There are good people everywhere, don't let a few idiots change your perception of any group.

...We are not going to compromise our defense by telling all of it. We will, however, hand over all of the things which have been provided us and a few of the big obvious mistakes. In the end it was not a positive result.

...The questions and other stuff have become too much for me to reply. Thank you all for the personal messageg if I didn't get a chance to reply and sorry to the posters who I overlooked. I'll be fairly buisy tomorrow but will try to answer what I can.

Just so you know, weather you are with me or against, I am sincerely enjoying myself.

...It's the Birmingham Hip resurfacing process which was the choice because of the bone saving quality and the bearing surfaces. After much research by Dr David Chao of the Oasis Medical Clinic and Dr Brent Kay, we concluded that this will give me the best odds of restoring quality of life and preventing later problems. It is a newly approved process in the USA but there are currently more than 60,000 worldwide. I am doing very well at this point and have been pedaling for 15 minutes a day. That's a far cry from 3 months ago, but, all things considered, I am feeling very well and am excited to demonstrate what this hip is capable of doing.
Absent Floyd, Daily Peloton Forum goes into pointed discussion about whether Landis had a glucose IV after stage 16, and whether that is legal. Landis has been vague, and the posters argue the legality. There doesn't appear to be a clear answer.

Floyd returns in the morning:
...please don't focus too much on the white out (although we have been provided copies and cannot rub it off). The real issues are much more substantial and yes I do regret saying anything at all in the begining of this. In my defense, I did not come up with the alcohol argument, I was telling everyone what I had done the night before for no other reason than to give an interview so they would leave my friends and family alone. It's hard for anyone, who didn't see it, to understand the magnitude of what went on but most certainly the alcohol defence was created later by someone else.

...I, for one, want to be clear that I never directed my arguments at the French in general. Not only because it doesn't make any sense but because I have found them to be people like everyone else (i.e. proud and defensive of the country and culture in which they live). Let us not focus on the exceptions even though I am begining to understand that a few of the exceptions are participating here.

[comparing to Hamilton]
...I don't believe that these two cases are related apart from the obvious. Our argumends will be definitive examples within provided documents which demonstrate that, acording to WADAs own guidelines and any and all other studies which we can find, the sample was never positive. As far as motivation, I don't know, but can assume that it must be one of; lack of knowledge about said test, malice, stupid mistakes. Either way, someone must be responsible.

[why go onto a forum?]
For the same reason that I enjoy a good group ride on a sunday morning. Most of the people are pleasant to be around, some I would invite over later for a beer, and a few would be better off somewhere else and everyone hates them. But to make it a good ride you need them all. (the ones causing crashes aren't necessary)

...At this point I don't care which side of the fence you find yourself, what brings me here is your interest in the subject and the time you have all spent thinking about it. I need it, I'm a cyclist, not a lawyer or scientist or anything else. Why turn down free brainpower?

...I like to be a "smart ass" too. Maybe that explains why I'm here, I realy am just another guy who happens to be able to pedal harder than most.

[about code of silence in the peloton]
...I try not to give too much credence to rumors as I do not often know where or why they began. Certainly if someone shows up with a bullhorn and announces that they themselves dope, I would accept that as truth because I can't think of a good reason to do that if it was't true. I am still waiting to see that.

[about confidence in his defense]
If I had no good defense, I would take the advice of Mr. Mcqaid and save my money.

[on an offer of lunch pickup]
Man I am gaining weight at an incredible rate but what the hell I'll take a double double, animal style.

[about Boonen complaining about stage length]
Tom Boonen is not a stage racer. I don't go to the Tour of Flanders and complain about needing a new diaper. It is incredible how so many complainers can exist in such a difficult sport but that's the way it is. I think that they should shorten the Long Jump.
After Landis split for the day, DPF largely turned towards the case, taking a brief detour to bash over the Hamilton case. One person noted that Hamilton got screwed procedurally, but was going to lose anyway. Others think the procedural problems were overstated. Almost all were of the opinion that, well, he was guilty.

In discussing Landis, there is substantial consensus that crying about procedural flaws is a quick trip to a ban. The defense must focus on refuting the execution of the tests or the interpretation of their results. TBV agrees, having said this way back when.


BicycleDiaries talks about gentle bikers in Lancaster county, Landis hook.

TdF Blog says Landis taking the offensive, gives a plug.
PJ gets the drift of the defense, thinks it can work. Says upgrade PR to emphasize innocence instead of "not guilty".
Rant takes advantage of available length to hope people will actually look at the arguments.
Cheeseflavor (new to us) drops in and hopes he can prove innocence.
Riley says the case shows it good to question media reports.
Lucas Chan notes the Wikipedia angle and imagines Litigation 2.0?
TogoParts picks up BikeBiz, plugs TBV.



Anonymous said...

Thanks for doing this! -Chris @ podium cafe

Chris and Chrissy Miller said...

finally covered by ESPN ...

Anonymous said...

TBV -- kudos to you for presenting your blog in such a way that Floyd picked you -- YOU! -- to start leaking documents about his defense.

I'm at a loss for words. First he plays the ferret (and maybe plays as LNDD in the other forum? maybe?) and then sits around and answers questions on the Daily Peleton Forum for people who just happen to be in there too. How freaking cool is that??! I'm totally blown away.

Keep up the fantastic work ... I check in a couple times a day and can't wait to see how this all plays out. I never thought he did anything wrong or illegal anyway, and this is so, so exciting...