How about a "Floyd Landis in the Media" sticky? [Archive] - Page 3

MediaCreations

07-28-06, 12:38 AM

I'd love to see him cleared but I'm not going to hold my breath.

I was just writing about it on my blog. The only upside is that Cadel Evans might jump up a place.

Guest

07-28-06, 12:53 AM

I was about to say that he is either a very, very good liar... or he is very, very inncocent.

Then I heard the second questioner ask her second question about alcohol mixing with cortisone to create a positive.

He seemingly ignored it, but it doesn't matter... The seed was planted. This is the little piece of rational thinking that we can hold on to to convince ourselves he is innocent.

Fry 'em!

He did sound pretty nervous, though.

Sometimes, you have to ignore a question so stupid that it's just wasted oxygen. ;)

The problem with the reporters was that they gave a question in like 27 parts. Sometimes I lost track of what the questions were! No wonder. It's up to the reporter to repeat the question or ask him to answer a part he didn't get to earlier. Some reporters obviously did. This reporter didn't. Can he help it if she's defective with asking questions?

Koffee

Hitchy

07-28-06, 04:02 AM

Does anyone really expect him to admit it?

...exactly, apart from david Millar & some US mountain biker (whose name I can't recall), I can't remember anyone EVER saying..."Oh Ok, you got me, I'm guilty"......every single one of them has been innocent...no one has ever doped!

Hitchy

07-28-06, 04:50 AM

if its a "natural" result shouldnt it have shown up in his previous tests during the tour?

Duh!

EURO

07-28-06, 05:55 AM

I want to believe that fantastic ride he had was him and him alone.
Dude, you are going to have to pick another sport, I think.

McSpin

07-28-06, 05:59 AM

mrkott3r

07-28-06, 06:08 AM

...I think these are the basic questions that need to answered at this time.

Seeing that the test is on the books, means something is wrong if they fail the test. Its not like the UCI is just gonna come up with some random test?
Why test if someone had cornflakes or weetbix for breakfast? neither are performance enhancing.

Odin

07-28-06, 06:11 AM

Crap Gabe! Everyone knows Weetbix are second only to Weeties. ;)

McSpin

07-28-06, 06:17 AM

Seeing that the test is on the books, means something is wrong if they fail the test. Its not like the UCI is just gonna come up with some random test?
Why test if someone had cornflakes or weetbix for breakfast? neither are performance enhancing.

Are you saying that you don't care if there is any significance to the results they'd measured? Is is not important to know, if false positives occur at a very high level? There are lots of tests were false positives are near 50% - which pretty much makes the tests worthless. I'd like to know these things before I make any judgements.

mrkott3r

07-28-06, 06:20 AM

Are you saying that you don't care if there is any significance to the results they'd measured?

Yes I do, but I also believe the testing agency has some scientific ethics. ie the test has some merit before the results are used at this high level and the results are reliable to the standard (whatever scientists agree upon), and the test is valid, as I said in my previous post, they arent going to test for something that is irrelevant.

McSpin

07-28-06, 06:29 AM

they arent going to test for something that is irrelevant. I'm not so sure about that. I would still like to know the significance of the test, with the normal level of testosterone Landis had. I've heard of number of comments on the news from experts who are questioning these results. There is something amiss according to them. This is enough for me to want to know more.

mrkott3r

07-28-06, 06:34 AM

I'm not so sure about that. I would still like to know the significance of the test, with the normal level of testosterone Landis had. I've heard of number of comments on the news from experts who are questioning these results. There is something amiss according to them. This is enough for me to want to know more.

Sure. But I think we also have to play by the umpire's rules. if it is found that Floyd has cheated, I think it is wrong to start trashing the tests and the UCI.

This is not saying the the UCI is god, but challenges to the tests and procedures should not occur when a rider's career is on the line. It should occur when the test is introduced or when new scientific research is done.

McSpin

07-28-06, 06:37 AM

This is not saying the the UCI is god, but challenges to the tests and procedures should not occur when a rider's career is on the line. Actually, I can't think of a better time to challenge a test that may be detecting something that is no advantage to the rider. This is why I want to know more.

Motophoto

07-28-06, 09:17 AM

Well I am sure this will come as no surprise to anyone but Floyd Landis has canceled his appearance for Friday (today) on the Tonight Show with Jay Leno.

Delta

07-28-06, 09:48 AM

There aren't allegations, there is a positive test.

That would be incorrect. It's not a positive test. It's a test which shows abnormalities. Don't let your feelings get in the way of facts.

Dinstee

07-28-06, 09:51 AM

That would be incorrect. It's not a positive test. It's a test which shows abnormalities. Don't let your feelings get in the way of facts.

+1

C_Heath

07-28-06, 09:57 AM

11:30 today, in spain. Is it gonna be on TV?

wagathon

07-28-06, 09:58 AM

Interesting quote from a good article in the WSJ:

"Testosterone can build muscle and improve recovery time when used over a period of several weeks, said Dr. Gary Wadler, a member of the World Anti-Doping Agency and a spokesman for the American College of Sports Medicine. But if Mr. Landis had been a user, his earlier urine tests during the tour would have been affected, he said. "So something's missing here," he said. "It just doesn't add up.""

so . . .could the answer bee a blood transfusion with a high level of testosterone? That would explain the negatives and then the positive. . .

I smell the French.

Journeyman

07-28-06, 10:01 AM

Vampares, "God Bless Cancer" what in the &&&& are you talking about?

"God bless cancer. I hope it touches everyones life so that they can better respect the triumphs of cycling. Some people are like ten pounds of tumors in a nine pound bag." You've got to be kidding me, I can't believe anyone would say anything that ignorant?

jman

Karlotta

07-28-06, 10:06 AM

That would be incorrect. It's not a positive test. It's a test which shows abnormalities. Don't let your feelings get in the way of facts.

Fact: Landis has an adverse analytical finding following an anti-doping test on Sample A after the Morzine Stage

Fact: If Sample B indicates the same adverse analytical finding, Phonak has said it will terminate Landis.

Fact: Cycling enthusiasts can expect 8 months or so of back and forth announcements, a la Tyler Hamilton, related to this test, this substance, this rider, this association, this sport.

Fact: Riding your own bike is still fun!

Walter

07-28-06, 10:25 AM

According to published accounts somewhere from "100s" to "every" rider who has taken a failed T-E test to the CAS has prevailed on appeal.

Regardless of the current Landis situation that raises questions.

Primarily what is the ultimate use of a test that is beaten so regularly on appeal?

I guess you can maintain that the test is legit and the riders are escaping on reasonable doubt created by highly paid experts but even so there's an awful lot of expense to try to prove a point on behalf of the WADA and/or UCI.

Am I the only one that sees it this way?

georgiaboy

07-28-06, 10:58 AM

on CNN tonight at 900pm EST

There is a tab to submit a question if you so desire.

http://www.cnn.com/CNN/Programs/larry.king.live/

Groundhog1248

07-28-06, 11:01 AM

I can tell you this, if I was the one getting tested I would want to piss in a cup and escort it myself to the lab with all those freaking idiot europeans over there. I wouldn't trust any of them with my urine sample. Chalk me up as anti-euro with all the crap lance had to put up with.

NoRacer

07-28-06, 11:01 AM

He's on CNN now.

ZachS

07-28-06, 11:11 AM

Has anyone heard how a person gets a low epitestosterone level with ratios that high? Is there an advantage to low epitestosterone? Is there an advantage to a high ratio of epitestosterone to testosterone, even when testosterone is normal? I was also wondering what the false positive percentage is for this type of test. I think these are the basic questions that need to answered at this time.

the way i've heard it, having one ratio or another provides no advantage or disadvantage. a high ratio is just a signal that the test subject may have used an external source of testosterone.

-VELOCITY-

07-28-06, 11:20 AM

Thanks for the heads up.

g3ck0

07-28-06, 11:20 AM

Fact: Landis has an adverse analytical finding following an anti-doping test on Sample A after the Morzine Stage

Fact: If Sample B indicates the same adverse analytical finding, Phonak has said it will terminate Landis.

Fact: Cycling enthusiasts can expect 8 months or so of back and forth announcements, a la Tyler Hamilton, related to this test, this substance, this rider, this association, this sport.

Fact: Riding your own bike is still fun!

That's the most random reply I've read so far. Only the first fact pertains to this thread. And it's not an 'adverse finding' - it's just a result.

toshi

07-28-06, 11:32 AM

That links to a 2005 post with Lance Armstrong as the interviewee.

georgiaboy

07-28-06, 11:36 AM

That links to a 2005 post with Lance Armstrong as the interviewee.

Thanks, I changed the link to the correct one. CNN announced the show but did not post it until a few minutes later.

toshi

07-28-06, 11:40 AM

Just found it! Thanks. :)

EURO

07-28-06, 11:54 AM

I smell the French.
I smell the childish and wide-eyed naivety of the United States.

Crack'n'fail

07-28-06, 12:27 PM

7/28: Breaking News: Tour de France winner Floyd Landis will appear on CNN's
Larry King Live tonight (Fri) from 9-10pm (ET)

Karlotta

07-28-06, 12:43 PM

That's the most random reply I've read so far. Only the first fact pertains to this thread. And it's not an 'adverse finding' - it's just a result.
Not so random -- I was replying in response to someone who stated that emotions are clouding facts.
BTW, the correct terminology according to UCI is "adverse analytical finding"... that's the language they used in the press release.

HWS

07-28-06, 01:00 PM

Go to msnbc.com. You can see about 2 1/2 minutes of it there.

flythebike

07-28-06, 01:08 PM

News stories here: http://sports.espn.go.com/oly/cycling/news/story?id=2532396
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/28/AR2006072800802.html

I've seen enough of these doping scandals (Remember the "I believe Tyler" buttons) not to get too wrapped up emotionally in the outcomes of these things. But hopefully, my boy didn't cheat. It would be strange for him to deny it so strongly and insist the B sample will come back clean or explicable if he was dirty. But Tyler Hamilton did that too and look how his case turned out.

reef58

07-28-06, 01:09 PM

I smell the childish and wide-eyed naivety of the United States.

Euro I agree with you in opinion that Landis doped. Down and out, nothing to lose, comeback of the decade, and suspicious drug test all in one day. That is a lot of circumstantial evidence. That being said you sure will not let the facts get in the way of your arguments will you?

Richard

Helmet Head

07-28-06, 01:15 PM

Is there a complete transcript posted anywhere?

Walter

07-28-06, 01:22 PM

I'm pretty sure it's naivete, even in England.

:beer:

iluvfreebeer

07-28-06, 01:22 PM

flythebike

07-28-06, 01:36 PM

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/28/AR2006072800802.html

He reiterates his denial in a press conference today. Evidently the test is complicated, according to that article. Landis will have an endocrinological test done to lend credence to his argument that he has a high natural level of testesterone.

Euro's logic is really telling. Impossible Landis could have won on his own. Witness all his arguments about how the field let him go in stage 17. How great he must feel to have this deus et machina appear to rescue him. The problem, can he declare Oscar Pererio his lord and saviour?

reef58

07-28-06, 01:37 PM

are we not listening?! It's been stated that 1. His testosterone levels weren't high - his epitest. levels were very low. 2. To use testosterone for one day wouldn't give a rider any significant advantage, since testosterone, a steroid, needs to be adminstered in 6-12 week cycles (just ask your local high school linebacker...he can tell you all about it) 3. These tests are highly unreliable and any athlete who has fought this has won. an 11-1 ratio is terrible - if it's due to HIGH testosterone levels, but if it's because of low epi levels, then really i think it's a nonissue. Lets crucify this guy before we get the facts straight, shall we?!

Could his levels before or after stage 16 have been extremely low? Then after using the patch having the levels return to a more normal range with only the ratio being the tell tale sign of use?

Richard

voltman

07-28-06, 01:51 PM

Yeeeeehaw!

flythebike

07-28-06, 02:05 PM

Could his levels before or after stage 16 have been extremely low? Then after using the patch having the levels return to a more normal range with only the ratio being the tell tale sign of use?

Richard

Up until then he wasn't riding like his levels of anything good were low. He says he didn't use a patch.

7rider

07-28-06, 02:06 PM

Why test if someone had cornflakes or weetbix for breakfast?

Crap Gabe! Everyone knows Weetbix are second only to Weeties.

Egads, have you seen the size of a Weetabix next to a Weeties?!

reef58

07-28-06, 02:16 PM

Up until then he wasn't riding like his levels of anything good were low. He says he didn't use a patch.

I beg to differ. Something good was low on stage 16. Oh he said he didn't then it must be true. I hope, but I doubt.

Richard