Did this person even read the book?
You will not learn the in's and out's of training.
Reread the section on his training with Allen Lim. You really get a good idea not only of his day-to-day training, but also of how he used a power meter to achieve all his goals. He also talked about his brother-in-law following him in a car for training, using an altitude tent, etc. There's a LOT of info on his training and what it's all like. He even included some info on training with Discovery.
As to his other comments:
1. It is entirely possible to not have heard of the TDF as a small town mountain biker. For one, the mountain bike mags (has this guy even read one?) NEVER mention the TDF. It's a completely diff. world. The two cultures are completely diff. The mountain bike world Floyd was in has more to do with the "X Games" than with road racing.
2. Vaughters alleged IM conversation. First off, this has nothing to do with the 2002 stage that the reviewer brings up here (as the IM conversation refers to 2004) so no idea why he connects the two but even with that, Vaughters has denied the conversation is real and it didn't stand up in court. Why then would Landis put it in his book, bringing up that alleged (and Vaughters-denied) conversation?
3. Lying about his hip. It is a valid point that he did not tell his team BUT two points on that:
* He states that had he not been able to train adequately from the start, he would inform the team.
This makes total sense because if he can train, it's a non-issue. If not, then he lets them know
before any race rosters are made (for the races he'd be in). I see no problem with that.
* There is not a single pro athlete who has not, at one time or another, hid an injury and played
through it. It's the nature of the game. It's like people who go to work when they're sick with
a contagious illness but they don't want to risk losing their job (perhaps there are possible firings
hanging over the place - which is the life of a pro athlete).
4. Ferrari. I don't know if this guy has ever visited Ferrari's website, read "Lance Armstrong's War" or any of the papers Ferrari has written, but aside from the doping-advice-crap, the guy's a genius. He's had some amazing discoveries for cyclists and endurance athletes (including the 6.7 watts/kg with another scientist and the fast-cadence). If you believe Dan Coyle, Ferrari's the one who came up with Lance's fast cadence by studying the top African marathon runners' strides. There's some good science behind it. He does advocate doping (he's admitted he thinks that if it makes an athlete "better" that he sees no harm) which is crap, I agree, but that doesn't mean he's not also an amazing trainer with some brilliant ideas.
5. landis being ok with kicking off OP teammates. Valid point. Although, when Landis was kicked off Phonak, he had no problem with that. His problem was with the test results and the UCI/LNDD's handling of the information, etc. He never blamed Rhis or anyone on Phonak and even wrote a letter saying that he was sad they had to go through all this. He was fine (at the time) with being removed from Phonak. Still, it is a valid point.
6. Landis left the team to go secretly to california for his hip. OK, but he never missed a doping control so it's not really an issue.
7. Landis complained about riders being held out of TDF without evidence. No problem with this. In fact, Contador, the new champ, was found innocent after being held out of the TDF. Assuming you believe the authorities who found him innocent, that is a travesty of justice.
8. Dr. Chao being in his hotel room shows that he had access to cheat. This is idiotic. ASO, WADA and UCI all knew the doctors were there and that he was receiving cortisone for his hip. I'm sure they were monitored as a result of this allowed medical exemption.
9. Landis never joined in doping conversations. I see no problem with this. Why would you talk about something that can only distract you from your job, and possibly say something bad that can come back to bite you. it reminds me of people I've worked with who are complaining about either the client, the boss, etc and if you don't join in, they don't trust you anymore and put you on the outside. If you DO join in, it ruins your love of the job and frequently can come back to bite you in the ass for some coment you made. It's a no-win situation.
10. Landis saying he didn't use performance-enhancing drugs is not good enough because he could have blood doped. This is just stupid and irrelevant. Landis tested positive for a performance-enhancing drug. If he says he didn't take any, then he's answered ALL the accusations against him.
11. Landis said that the lab would make the same mistake on B as A and this means every rider would test positive. Well, not quite. I do agree that Landis' logic was a bit faulty here but so is the reviewers. The mistake they made might require certain blood types, substances in the blood, or whatever contaminated the sample. If they make the mistake every time, it might not have the same effect. Both are wrong.
12. Says the point is not whether Lance cheated but that they never caught him. Valid to question Floyd's logic here. I understand he's saying that if Lance cheated then the tests aren't accurate but his statement also leaves the door wide open to the thought that the tests do work and that's why Landis was caught and Armstrong was not.
13. Landis says no good comes from rooting in the past and Landis is protecting Lance. I actually think Landis is right. instead of wasting time and money going after Lance, shouldn't they be spending that on today's situation? And remember, going back to test old ANONYMOUS samples is not rooting in the past. There's a diff. Also, Landis does not protect Lance. He's actually less than complimentary of him throughout the book.
14. Landis being friends with Geoghegan tells us that Landis must be just as evil and underhanded because you can accurately judge a person by their friends. This is an inaccurate suggestion at best. However, even if it could prove that Landis was a jerk towards people it doesn't prove cheating. There are plenty of criminals with morals about specific issues. Trashing others does not prove cheating. It's entirely possible to have respect only for achieving personal improvement and none for other people.
15. Landis says he told Will he had to go but the next day he was sitting behind Landis. A valid point on the "firing". I do want to know more on this. (Again,. it doesn't prove cheating but it is an important point to get the truth on)
16. Landis didn't want the other 7 samples tested. FALSE. he didn't want them tested by LNDD. He was fine with UCAL or another lab testing them. It doesn't prove anything that LNDD found they confirmed their other findings since the issue at hand here is that Landis claims LNDD's testing is faulty or maliciously inaccurate. Having LNDD confirm their own findings proves nothing either way.
17. Landis' claim that bacteria ruined his sample are wrong because Landis couldn't have ridden as he did with bacteria. Wow, this misses the point entirely. He's NOT saying HE had bacteria. he's saying the lab did not follow proper procedures and let either the sample in the tube or the machine get contaminated.
I'd say the reviewer has maybe 2-3 valid points and that's it. he was disingenuous throughout, inaccurate, misleading and wrong in so many places. What a poor job.