Thursday, November 30, 2006

Thursday Roundup

In a CyclingNews update on Tyler Hamilton, there is substantial opinion on FL and his case.

"I support Floyd 100%," confessed Hamilton. "And I am happy to see him making his case so public. Staying quiet was the biggest mistake I made in my case. So much evidence and argument gets misinterpreted by the media and people are left with misinformation and the wrong impression.

CyclingPost says Landis was still of the big stories for the month of November.

Rick Carpiniello of the Journal News, in a story about doping in sports, mentions FL and says his early reactions to the positive sample may have cost him.

Blogs has a two month medical update. Everything looks great, with a 4 hour/250 watt average ride last Sunday.

Cycling Commentary states that FL would have been cyclist of the year, if only....

Rant has a potpourri of short items. LeMond, WADA and LNDD lab statistics, concluding with some wondering about the authenticity of the hacker/whistleblower documents. Following our "ferret", Rant has bestowed "Le Rongeur" (The Rodent) on the perp. There remains a lot of doubt what is fake and what is real about them, and Rant challenges the rodent to give him a copy. Heck, I'm sure we'd all like to dissect them.

At DPF, Duckstrap makes the strong case that the 3 or 4 metabolites make the most scientific sense to declare a positive on the IRMS CIR, at post #59. Deeper analysis in this TBV feature, because this seems important.



Anonymous said...

A suggestion (not sure if this is realistic). After reading some of Floyd's posts at DPF, it appears he is very forthright when inclined to be that way. I've seen that TBV makes comments on DPF. Could TBV get Floyd to make some brief comments directly for this blog. Most of what I've read at DPF is a lot of discussion of the finer points of the testing methods, etc. (There are exceptions, like Floyd's very direct statements about Greg LeMond.)

This is what I'd like to know: What does Floyd think is the bottom line in all of this? Surely he must have a theory. Assuming that he's innocent (which a lot of us hope is the case), where does he think things went haywire? Was his S17 sample mixed up with another from the TDF? Was LLND just careless, using sloppy testing procedures? Was there a conspiracy somewhere in the UCI, LLND, or TDF organization? (No matter how crazy the conspiracy theories are, they ARE one possible explanation for what's happened.)

Maybe Floyd isn't ready to say what he thinks happened, but by this time he must have a gut level feeling about what went wrong. Maybe he'd be willing to answer some questions for TBV.

DBrower said...

Hi anon,

While TBV has some visibility, it's not exactly the major news outlet you'd want to use to break a story with an interview. We're flattered to have been able to help with document distribution, mainly because we have the infinite space and interest to be comprehensive, but we aren't Larry King, or Gumpbel, or Stade 2, or even Velonews/CyclingNews/Pez/DailyPeloton. I'd feel kind of embarrasingly presumptuous to ask.

There are a lot of things in your list of questions that we're led to believe he's not going to spill until he files briefs for the hearing. It's just not realistic to expect that to come out publicly until it does.


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


Just a thought, but I'll bet that Howard Jacobs has told Floyd to keep a lid on that kind of commentary until the case has played out. Never hurts to ask, but I wouldn't expect an answer right now.

- Rant

Anonymous said...

Sorry to veer off topic, but did you see the world of anti-doping just entered a brand-new absurd arena?

I'm all for keeping the cheating out of sport, but sometimes I wonder where reality stops and delusion starts.