Friday, November 17, 2006

Friday Roundup

Quote of the day

The anti doping system is deeply flawed in bringing about any real ethics or justice and accomplish the real job before us to make all sports drug free. But go ahead and make this statement one that I am soft on doping, which is untrue. I am hard on justice and ethics procedures that will accomplish the job.

The current system won't, and in fact hasn't.

But Hell, let's set up the guillotine and roll the carts its too damn much fun to watch the heads roll.


AP via first report about slideshow 2.0 by Dr. Arnie Baker in Tucson. Report is light on defense details of interest here, but Baker showed some of the hack documents. He said he wasn't the hacker, that he's had them more than a month, and that he's gotten them from multiple sources. He also said that the authorities should be more concerned about what's in the documents rather than where they came from.

Arizona Daily Starsays Landis will attend El Tour in Tucson tomorrow
Race founder Richard DeBernardis said Landis was trying to decide whether to ride on a tandem with coach Robbie Ventura, ride alone, or be a spectator and walk to the start line of each of El Tour's races

Tucson Citizen says,
Top American cyclist Floyd Landis will be on hand but will not race in the El Tour de Tucson on Saturday, El Tour officials said Friday.

Cycling News has more from Mr. Pound and more on DNA.
On the issue of the Floyd Landis case and the alleged external intrusion on the main server of the Ch√Ętenay-Malabry laboratory, Pound argued that "For me, the real problem is the activities of one or more hackers who entered into the system without permission, possibly against the law. We have to wait for the result of the investigation. There will be a hearing in January, where arbitrators will consider all the evidence."

Press Release about Baker talk gives more hints. Key arguments will be:
  • Best practice and WADA positivity criteria were not met
  • There were significant LNDD lab errors
  • The sample analyzed was contaminated
  • LNDD's testing procedures are unreliable and illogical
The release says the download of the presentation won't be available until Monday, which surprises us.

At Sports Illustrated, Austin Murphy praises Andreu as a sportsman, and takes a carefully balanced view of Landis. He'd previously been critical of Landis, but seems to be backing off.

The Times (UK) rounds up a number of recent stories.

At TBV, Marc looks at the typos again, raises more questions.

Shmigginations is justifiably irked at generalized anti-French xenophobia.

Hack-in-the-box briefly notes the computer security angle.

GetOutdoors says Landis is still a dope.

Rant goes off about the separate French case mentioned yesterday by Bordry.
PJ considers Bordry, and implies he's criticising TBV. Huh? I can't hear you, sonny.

The Boulder Report manages to blend Thomas Dolby and Alan Greenspan with Floyd and Landis:
Froth would be a good way to describe the reaction to the news this week that the Chatenay-Malabry laboratory, which performed the test which apparently caught Landis doping with testosterone, had its computer system breached and records surreptitiously gained by an intruder who, according to reports in the media, may be an associate of Landis’. Landis denies this completely, saying it’s yet another instance of character assassination.

He's not happy with what he sees as Landis's exploitation of USADA gagging itself, nor of blogdom's tendency towards blowhard punditry. (I think he means Rant.) Comments to the article debate about the responsibility of blogging and forums in the case.

Other blogs chip in: Poli-cycle, James Dixson invokes The Dude; Vanderhoot doesn't want a technicality decision and has good comments; Better do it right is confused; Triple Crankset is resurrecting Floyd; Ion Resistance says, "
Procedure is usually the guilty man’s argument, but not this time."; TourDeFrancLogue dittos TdFblog, and also comments on Jen's great idea.

The Sauce cites S16 as an example about dehydration and recovery.

At DPF, Jimmy looks at Marc's typo review, and isn't as disturbed, thinking they are all on non-substantive summary pages.



Anonymous said...

B sample, why do we need that pesky B sample.

After all, if we say they're positive, they're positive...

Anonymous said...

The more this plays out, the less professional LNDD, WADA and USADA look.

It is hard to believe how Dick Pound trying to spin the LNDD record (thanks for the IHT / Cycling News links).

Forget the fact that it appears that LNDD has made repeated procedural and anylitical errors.

According to Pound, the REAL PROBLEM is "the activities of hackers who entered into the system without permission" and the possibility that "a lot of this information has been illegally obtained".

Seems to me the REAL PROBLEM is that professional cyclists can't count on the organizations who monitor and control their sport to follow official procedures or to refrain from biased public statements.

I could be wrong...

Anonymous said...

The more this plays out, the less professional LNDD, WADA and USADA look


Note to Dick Pound and associates: If you're going to play God, you'd damn well better be omniscient, omnipotent, and infallible.

daniel m (a/k/a Rant) said...


Manomanischewitz, when did I get promoted to the ranks of the blowhard pundits? Someone at Bicycling reads little old me? And pays attention? The horror!


- Rant

Maybe he should check out the Toxic discussions, for a real eye-opener.