Saturday, February 24, 2007

Saturday Roundup

The San Luis Obispo Tribune presents a story largely about baby boomers staying active through medical care and procedures such a hip replacements and resurfacings. Floyd Landis visited Arroyo Grande Hospital yesterday (as part of his work for Smith and Nephew) to chat with patients who have recently undergone hip surgery.

The San Diego Union Tribune's Nick Canepa MUST be a "Young Frankenstein" fan. And what he observes explains everything:

Floyd Landis' Tour de France tests were botched when the nutty U.S. Anti-Doping Agency sent Igor to the lab and he came back with urine samples from “Abbe Normal.”

Marin Independant Journal has an excellent article on the prospects of the Tour of California, with a teeny little mention of Landis to justify our inclusion here.

Spinnin' Wheel warns the Landis camp not to let the press get too carried away with the "getting off on a technicality"issue. She still thinks there is room to feel encouraged by the news of the past few days. And maybe there is a future in soaps for Floyd, "As the Floyd Turns" indeed!

FingerFood thinks Landis will NOT lose his Tour de France victory. He wonders if we should apologize to the French.

Tex's Luavull Cycling thinks that the real enemies of cycling are the UCI and the ASO and that whether he cheated or not Floyd Landis isn't the one putting a stain on the sport. He also gets in an Indycar vs CART reference!

The 700 level thinks that most people don't care about cycling, and that there may be a conspiracy against Landis, but that IF Landis retains the Tour de France title he will be the Barry Bonds of cycling. Put this one down for possible "snark of the day".

The Buck Stop thinks Landis may be vindicated after all, and gives him the benefit of the doubt.

Pommi files two posts, the first thinking the "two technicians" might lead to dismissal, the second one wondering if it is a problem at all. The world wonders.

8 Man RAAM Team
admires Landis' fight, and wants to turn the tables on some "they all dope" friends.

CyclingLogue covers this developments with an understated blurb:
An article in the Los Angeles Times is reporting that the positive tests done on Floyd Landis in that French lab “show a protocol violation.” Y’know, because his case couldn’t get any more complicated.
Mike Jacoubowsky of Chain Reaction bikes has some pictures from the San Jose event.

DPF has a bunch of relevant threads going.
  • The B sample flap and retesting discussion continues with some good research by Ferren, which is still inconclusive about use of B's for retesting when A's are unavailable.
  • The "two technician" issue continues to be debated, and it appears there is inadequate information about what the technicians involvement was with either sample. Skeptics think the media reports are overblown, and represent wishful thinking by the defense. It's confusing to Pommi too, see above.

Focused Trainers Forum super moderator Gabe Rinaldi identifies himself as The Muscle, but doesn't like his picture. Fortunately, he doesn't know where we live.

Rec.Bicycles.* has a few threads going, this one with an insightful comment:
> Imagine anyone taking testosterone and then going for a win the next day!
> It requires the IQ of Asher or someone to believe anything that stupid.

I don't think the "stupidity defense" is a smart move. It's well known that criminals get caught because they're... stupid. Smart people don't (usually) get caught. Thus, if you already think someone's a criminal (doper), you also already believe they're stupid (since they got caught). You're not going to change the minds of anyone who matters with the "stupidity defense." Most likely the opposite.

Thought for the Day

If you can find a path with no obstacles, it probably doesn't lead anywhere.


Anonymous said...

Can somebody please answer whether Landis' defense team presented evidence during "stage 3" of the review process to the Independent Review Board/Independent Review hearing? I have tried searching the site, but I am inept at navigation.

DBrower said...

You are looking for the ADRB filing, which can be found in the "october documents" link at the top of every page.


Anonymous said...

TBV, I am quite perplexed by the continuous use of the word "technicality" to describe a potential outcome of Floyd's case. Any one of the current mistakes by the LNDD should have rendered the case over before it began. To trivialize these mistakes as being mere technicalities makes me wonder what isn't considered a technicality. As in, why bother creating the rules and proceedures, if you are not going to follow them. Just an observation.
Green MTN. Cyclery
Ephrata, PA.

Anonymous said...

Mike said:

"TBV, I am quite perplexed by the continuous use of the word "technicality" to describe a potential outcome of Floyd's case..."

My experience is that people & organizations tend to label facts they don't like as "technicalities" so as to make those inconvenient facts seem insignificant and unimportant. With regards to the regular media, it seems to me most of them simply parrot what they hear/read.

Northern Virginia