tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31819641.post4996361848508277912..comments2023-10-06T03:21:26.130-07:00Comments on trust but verify: FFF in SF reveals moreDBrowerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17718913310467614671noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31819641.post-90290221040093919362007-02-19T22:03:00.000-08:002007-02-19T22:03:00.000-08:00If this is true about the pressure being more than...If this is true about the pressure being more than 100% off during the IRMS test, then if I were on the arbitration panel (Floyd's team would probably like that) I'd have to assume the test results are invalid unless the USADA or LNDD can prove otherwise. If the people who are doing the testing don't operate the equipment properly how can the test results be taken seriously?<BR/><BR/>Is there anybody other than the machines designers who can really say what effect the over pressure has on the measurements? I'd be surprised if even they could say for sure without actually trying it and making some measurements.<BR/><BR/>I don't have a clue how the machine works, but I'd think that maximum accuracy is obtained only when running it at spec. Maybe that 0.8% accurace Baker quotes is really 1.6% or more when the machine isn't used properly. Maybe it's so high that even the one metabolite that was way over the limit falls within the margin of error.<BR/><BR/>Back in late July this test was called "fool-proof" and people over on DPF were telling me how simple it is. Ha, I say! Ha!<BR/><BR/>~ CubAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31819641.post-13045181289894994372007-02-19T15:39:00.000-08:002007-02-19T15:39:00.000-08:00Yeah, I realized shortly after my post that Ishoul...Yeah, I realized shortly after my post that Ishould have typed mass spectrometer. That's why I'm an art historian!Cheryl from Marylandhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09410608438374264074noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31819641.post-48238407024667332112007-02-19T08:31:00.000-08:002007-02-19T08:31:00.000-08:00We heard that Jonathon Vaughters is just willing t...We heard that Jonathon Vaughters is just willing to be edgy, and willing to show his commitment. I've heard someone say that to do Argyle, you have do go all in. It looked pretty neat to me, perhaps for lack of big title sponsorship logos.<BR/><BR/>Re: Baker, it wasn't the centrifuge, it was inlet pressure on the mass spectrometers. He appear to do his homework.<BR/><BR/>TBVDBrowerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17718913310467614671noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31819641.post-34805622134599342802007-02-19T08:14:00.000-08:002007-02-19T08:14:00.000-08:00Any reason the kit for Slipstream powered by Chipo...Any reason the kit for Slipstream powered by Chipotle is patterned argyle - even the socks??<BR/><BR/>Thanks TBV for the full report -- hope you and Mrs. TBV had a good time. Your readers look forward to any additional lab documents as well as translations of science French (props to Marc). <BR/><BR/>I'm impressed that Dr. Baker took the time to find documents for the centrifuge operational settings - of course, wouldn't that mean that EVERYONE'S TESTS ARE OFF?Cheryl from Marylandhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09410608438374264074noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31819641.post-54426263354727919252007-02-19T05:51:00.000-08:002007-02-19T05:51:00.000-08:00ORG here ...Remember that Floyd called this a WAR....ORG here ...<BR/><BR/>Remember that Floyd called this a WAR. So, his first job is to use this information to properly defend himself.<BR/><BR/>Maybe USADA doesn't have a copy of the AFLD version? These bureaucracies are so screwed up anything is possible.<BR/><BR/>Also, like the original LDP, it sounds like they are .pdfs of copies, meaning poor quality and in French. It is going to take some time to assemble them in a media and format for public consumption (the AFLD version was probably a hard copy, not an electronic version). Just dumping them on the internet in a raw form (which is how they got them) means hardly anyone can understand them.<BR/><BR/>In the end, I have no doubt these documents will become public. They have to as Floyd is also waging a public campaign. If they help prove he is not a doper, they will be public.<BR/><BR/>P.S. Regarding the question above, "did he lie?" If after $500,000 and a public campaign to acquit himself, if Landis and Baker are resorting to fabrications and lies at FFF events, then stop the process right now and start your two year suspension. This would be a bigger shock then proof he was a doper.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31819641.post-53503358551624954972007-02-19T05:06:00.000-08:002007-02-19T05:06:00.000-08:00TBV,Floyd has been up front to this point and the ...TBV,<BR/><BR/>Floyd has been up front to this point and the one thing that separates him from the pack is his willingness to share the documents that ultimately prove his innocence. It sound like there are new relevant mistakes in this additional packet of information. It would be in team Landis best interest to share this information as they have in the past because it lends to his credibility. By sharing earlier documents, Landis could find himself in a catch 22 if he doesn't share this time. <BR/><BR/>There are only 2 reasons I could see Landis not sharing the info. 1 It is not true. 2. that was a condition of release of the information. <BR/><BR/>I don't think anyone has the power to keep Landis from releasing the information. Do they? And on the first point why would Landis lie to us now. However, release of the information is critical to the believability factor. <BR/><BR/>Also, because Landis released the information is one more reason people like McQuaid look like such an a$$. McQuaid is treating this as a stereotypical he said she said, forgetting/ or choosing to forget that Floyd has made the information public which shines a bright spotlight on the incompetence of LNDD, WADA and UCI.<BR/><BR/>All said and done Floyd must release the new information if it is to have any credibility. Hell, he should have several copies at his event to pass out to the MEDIA . If you ask me that is a shortsighted misstep by Floyd's team not to have copies of the information to pass out to the media or at least a website where its scanned in. My guess is they have not had the information long enough to fully vet it. But they shouldn't let the TOC slow them down. Vet the info and get it out.<BR/><BR/>Atown, Tx.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com