"The 33"-Road Bike Racing - Very Good Article on Floyd

Print Version: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/19/sports/playmagazine/0819play-floyd.html?_r=1&adxnnl=1&oref=slogin&ref=sports&pagewanted=print&adxnnlx=1187323252-VPn/9odYhLD/snfZmoGuKw

Non Print Version: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/19/sports/playmagazine/0819play-floyd.html?ref=sports

Don't want to give it away but has some very interesting comments from Landis on Lemond and that whole affair and his thoughts on Lance as well as other stuff. it's a very fair/unbiased article that doesn't pick a side but gives both points of view and some insight into Floyd and his current situation. I'd say he's a bit of a broken man right now.

1+ on the article.

Professional cycling would have about a hundred-fold more interest for me if Floyd was back in it.

Good article...

Make a decision.

I just don't get the Floyd doping affair. It simply doesn't add up, never has. That's underscored by the preposterous amount of stalling on the final decision on his guilt or innocence. I really think the French lab screwed the pooch hardcore on this, and there is so much compelling evidence to that effect that they're having a helluva time convicting Floyd.

Utterly baffling and disturbing.

I just don't get the Floyd doping affair. It simply doesn't add up, never has. That's underscored by the preposterous amount of stalling on the final decision on his guilt or innocence. I really think the French lab screwed the pooch hardcore on this, and there is so much compelling evidence to that effect that they're having a helluva time convicting Floyd.

Utterly baffling and disturbing.

Unless you are Doc Ray...then it's clear.

;)

I guess the question for me would be if you are guilty and know you are guilty would you spend $2m (if the article is accurate) on your defense. Especially when even if you win you probably will have a tough time getting to the level of making back that kind of money. I know if it was me and I was guilty I would just walk away keep my money and find something else to do. If I'm not guilty then I might be more inclined to spend the dough to get back my credibility. Of course who knows what he is thinking.

I guess the question for me would be if you are guilty and know you are guilty would you spend $2m (if the article is accurate) on your defense. Especially when even if you win you probably will have a tough time getting to the level of making back that kind of money. I know if it was me and I was guilty I would just walk away keep my money and find something else to do. If I'm not guilty then I might be more inclined to spend the dough to get back my credibility. Of course who knows what he is thinking.

And that predisposition to give up and accept defeat is exactly why you are not a tour de france winner.

He will get off because the case against him is flawed. Not saying he didnt do it though....

Of course, there is the remote possiblity that Flandis was doping........ :rolleyes:

Of course there is a possibility Floyd was doping. But it still doesn't really make sense. It's not consistent with HOW you would dope to win the Tour, and Floyd's conduct afterwards isn't particularly consistent with somebody who's guilty in my view.

You guys rationalise too much. The obvious and simple explanation is he doped. The problem was they f'ed it up.

I just don't get the Floyd doping affair. It simply doesn't add up, never has. That's underscored by the preposterous amount of stalling on the final decision on his guilt or innocence. I really think the French lab screwed the pooch hardcore on this, and there is so much compelling evidence to that effect that they're having a helluva time convicting Floyd.

Utterly baffling and disturbing.

i cannot believe the 2007 tour is over and done with and there has not been a decision on 2006 yet. something smells fishy.

You guys rationalise too much. The obvious and simple explanation is he doped. The problem was they f'ed it up.

Because if I was gonna dope, i would use testosterone that takes a long time to work and not something that is instantaneous.

And if it takes a long time, how come it didn't show up prior to that test? Or after? Why was it only one test that was positive? And why would it be something that is not effective as an instantaneous effect?

Of course there is a possibility Floyd was doping. But it still doesn't really make sense. It's not consistent with HOW you would dope to win the Tour, and Floyd's conduct afterwards isn't particularly consistent with somebody who's guilty in my view.

Yeah T definitely is never used to boost recovery in GC riders and his repeated lying and all around disgusting behaviour is obviously just an innocent man trying to come to terms with being framed by those dastardly french.

Hamilton was innocent too right? I mean blood doping is simply unheard of and he said he was, didn't back down and even provided a far fetched explanation.

You guys rationalise too much. The obvious and simple explanation is he doped. The problem was they f'ed it up.

It is this particular brand of insightful analysis that brings me back to BF time and again. F Sam Abt and the NYTimes.

Yeah T definitely is never used to boost recovery in GC riders and his repeated lying and all around disgusting behaviour is obviously just an innocent man trying to come to terms with being framed by those dastardly french.

Hamilton was innocent too right? I mean blood doping is simply unheard of and he said he was, didn't back down and even provided a far fetched explanation.

I made no observation on Tyler's case, just Floyd's. And I never said Floyd is clearly innocent. I said the case against him is bizarre on a number of counts. I'll repeat my earlier statement (since repetition is the mother of comprehension, sometimes even on BF) that the case is utterly baffling and disturbing. And part of that 'disturbing' is that Floyd may indeed be guilty. But I do confess to having a hard time condenming him based on what I've seen so far.

i cannot believe the 2007 tour is over and done with and there has not been a decision on 2006 yet. something smells fishy.

+100

Especially when they say they are going to make an announcement and then nothing happens. Then they make another announcement and so on ad nauseum

Because if I was gonna dope, i would use testosterone that takes a long time to work and not something that is instantaneous.

And if it takes a long time, how come it didn't show up prior to that test? Or after? Why was it only one test that was positive? And why would it be something that is not effective as an instantaneous effect?

Maybe he had a blood transfusion (from stored bags of his own stuff) that wasn't properly "scrubbed" of anything he might have been taking when the blood was drawn.

And that predisposition to give up and accept defeat is exactly why you are not a tour de france winner.

I think if you are guilty it is more about accepting reality. In any event there are many more reasons than that for me not be wining the TdF.:)

I guess the question for me would be if you are guilty and know you are guilty would you spend $2m (if the article is accurate) on your defense. Especially when even if you win you probably will have a tough time getting to the level of making back that kind of money. I know if it was me and I was guilty I would just walk away keep my money and find something else to do. If I'm not guilty then I might be more inclined to spend the dough to get back my credibility. Of course who knows what he is thinking.

Exhibit A: Tyler Hamilton. Mounting a defense has no connection to actual guilt or innocence. Flip this argument around and they could be mounting a defense to either present an innocent image or hope to get off on a technicality, when they know they did dope.

Floyd told his mother he is innocent.

Isn't that good enough for you people??

:rolleyes:

Unless you are Doc Ray...then it's clear.

;)

It's clear for several reasons, the facts and the science. Facts are he lied, repeatedly.
Science is fine, there was some messy book keeping, but no more messy than a typical lab, and the ultimate test of any lab is the reproducibility outside that lab. 11:1 was reproduced outside, with FL observers.

Many people will learn and hopefully change some procedures about reporting and testing, but those are secondary to the heart of the matter: he juiced.

It's hard to remain objective when you read places like this forum (and ONLY this forum), where only one point of view is ever discussed, and misinformation from the Landis camp is discussed.

Proof of this: the positive result for steroids by Vinokourov. When Landis was positive, there were hundreds of opinions of why it was not possible because steroids were not beneficial. Yet, Vinokourov gets the same result, and he's guilty. No discussion.
" two much blood in my thighs" was stupid, but "two shots, four beers" was not.

A year later, OP and more testing, and it is now painfully obvious that the GC top ten all doped, and doping is a part of this sport at the pro levels -proven not just by WADA, but by independent investigations in Italy and Spain. ALL of the deniers have been proven to have lied, and many have just stepped up and admitted they lied. Look what it took for people to finally believe Hamilton was a doper.

We've heard sworn court testimony of the US Postal doping program, we've seen the fact that riders are slowing down, we've seen Discovery embrace Basso. Now, in an ultra-clean era when the doping gets tough, the tough got going (bye Armstrong and Bruyneel).

Thus, in the last 14 months, Landis supporters have gone from faithful (where 'faith' means just shut up and believe it), to gullible ($250K raised on his website) to now just plain stupid.

Vinokourov's problem? He's not American.

...and Barry Bonds gets the awards heaped on him.

Some people know what time it is, even if its the time they don't want to hear.

http://www.cheattowin.net/cheaters-corner/Floyd-Landis-R.article.jpg

I guess the question for me would be if you are guilty and know you are guilty would you spend $2m (if the article is accurate) on your defense....
*If* he did in fact dope: then he would have 2 choices with 3 outcomes:

1) Plead guilty, get humiliated, lose Tour winnings, career over, likely no way to earn money from cycling-related activities ever again.
2) Contest the findings, lose the case, be in the same state as 1)
3) Contest the findings, win the case, try to get back on a team and possibly even ride TdF in 08

Since he almost certainly did not realize how much the defense was going to cost when he started, and is obviously (regardless of his innocence or guilt) rather bull-headed, I'm sure that even if he was guilty, he felt he had nothing to lose and a tremendous amount to gain by contesting the findings.



And if it takes a long time, how come it didn't show up prior to that test? Or after? Why was it only one test that was positive? And why would it be something that is not effective as an instantaneous effect?
The isotope tests that were run later (spring 2007 iirc) allegedly indicate that he was using T on several days of the tour. They don't normally run the isotope tests on "A" samples, because it's rather expensive compared to just checking your T/E ratio. They only ran it because he failed a test.

Also, *if* he was using T it's not like he could stop right before, or during, the tour. It is my understanding that if you stop using T, you crash pretty hard. (When you are using synthetic testosterone, your body stops producing it naturally, so when you withdraw the synth your body basically has no T.)

Believe it or not, it really does make a lot of sense for a rider in his 30s to take T (and other PED's) in order to perform better during a grand tour, since you can recover at a super-human level. And if you manipulate the T/E ratio properly, chances are you may not get caught....

*If* he did in fact dope: then he would have 2 choices with 3 outcomes:

1) Plead guilty, get humiliated, lose Tour winnings, career over, likely no way to earn money from cycling-related activities ever again.

What wrong with coming clean (no pun intended)?

We all crab and moan what a bunch of liars they all are when they deny, but then people crab and moan the same when David Millar get back on a team after he does his two years without dragging it all out like Hamilton did.

Yeah, people can still suspect Millar all they want, but admitting guilt should be step one in reacceptance into the fold. Trust? That comes much much later.

There is forgiveness out there, but perhaps not a podium spot in a UCI event.

It's clear for several reasons, the facts and the science. Facts are he lied, repeatedly.
Science is fine, there was some messy book keeping, but no more messy than a typical lab, and the ultimate test of any lab is the reproducibility outside that lab. 11:1 was reproduced outside, with FL observers.


Actually, if you look at the lab's numbers, they didn't reproduce the 11:1 ratio even on the same sample. When they tested his sample the first time, they did two tests (this is normal) and got the following results:

Test 1: 61.37 T, 5.2 Epi
Test 2: 172.23 T, 17.59 Epi

By their own rules, that large of an error margin meant the tests were invalid and likely there was contamination or miscalibration of the equipment. Even in high school science class, if you'd gotten such widely varied results, you'd know you did something wrong.


Proof of this: the positive result for steroids by Vinokourov. When Landis was positive, there were hundreds of opinions of why it was not possible because steroids were not beneficial. Yet, Vinokourov gets the same result, and he's guilty. No discussion.
" two much blood in my thighs" was stupid, but "two shots, four beers" was not.

WOW, that's wrong. Vino never tested positive for steroids! He tested positive for using someone else's blood. Jeez, please don't draw conclusions on events for which you've not even gotten the facts.

Actually, if you look at the lab's numbers, they didn't reproduce the 11:1 ratio even on the same sample. When they tested his sample the first time, they did two tests (this is normal) and got the following results:

Test 1: 61.37 T, 5.2 Epi
Test 2: 172.23 T, 17.59 Epi

By their own rules, that large of an error margin meant the tests were invalid and likely there was contamination or miscalibration of the equipment. Even in high school science class, if you'd gotten such widely varied results, you'd know you did something wrong.



WOW, that's wrong. Vino never tested positive for steroids! He tested positive for using someone else's blood. Jeez, please don't draw conclusions on events for which you've not even gotten the facts.DocRay likes to make up facts, like he is a Doctor with any sort of credentials.

This article made me sad. The profound statements attributed to Landis are just depressing. "'It's a kangaroo court if there ever is one,” he laments." and "Landis liked to say that there was no happy ending for him" How depressing. I cannot see an upside to this case. Either Landis doped and the system screwed up so much as to risk letting him off or he is innocent and is screwed.

As a bigger issue, these bodies (USADA, LNDD, AFLD, WADA, etc) deal with so many sports and so many athletes that this case will have ripples throughout the Olympic Movement.

Regardless of the outcome of this particular case and regardless of his actual guilt or innocence every body involved from fans to athletes to sponsors loses here.



It's clear for several reasons, the facts and the science. Facts are he lied, repeatedly.
Science is fine, there was some messy book keeping, but no more messy than a typical lab, and the ultimate test of any lab is the reproducibility outside that lab. 11:1 was reproduced outside, with FL observers.
BS. Lying is an intentionally misleading statement rather than just an incorrect one. Lying implies intent. Guessing or relaying incorrect but believed statements is not lying. His "lies" were stupid and misleading but they were merely erroneous guesses. Also, what does his lying have to do with his guilt. He can lie and have been clean (perhaps be struck down by lighting?). He can lie and have been doping. You're clearly wrong here but I don't think you are lying I just think that you're wrong. I know nothing about your doping practices. If indeed he was intentionally misleading (lying) then that makes him a liar and maybe a doper but one has nothing to do with the other.

Additionally, do you know anything about lab work? Mistakes like witnesses for USADA openly admitted would shut down or invalidate most labs across the world that deal with important issues like health or food. I truly hope that the LNDD lab doesn't inspect food too- I don't trust the results enough to consume that food. Screwing up testing as bad as they admitted isn't a lab worker mistake but a systematic problem with the whole lab.

The "ultimate test of any lab" is in their credibility. This lab has issues. It doesn't matter if they can reproduce bad results ad nauseum if their believability is in doubt. In food labs a difference results far less than the difference between 4.5:1 and 11:1 would merit throwing away the old sample and getting a new sample- something not possible in this kind of testing. In trusting in such poor "evidence" and assuming it as their own, USADA has tarnished their own credibility.


Many people will learn and hopefully change some procedures about reporting and testing, but those are secondary to the heart of the matter: he juiced.


That is a shocking statement. You sir, are deluded. The effect of this case on a single athlete are far less important than the effects such a allegedly irresponsible and problematic system has upon the masses of athletes. This is the same organization that tests thousands of young athletes throughout the US (they tested Juniors at nationals earlier this summer). Are you really saying that their collective lives and futures are less important than sanctioning Landis?

It seems that you are willing to burn the witch regardless of the absurdity of the "trial" because you *know* the truth- did it come to you in a dream?


...By their own rules, that large of an error margin meant the tests were invalid and likely there was contamination or miscalibration of the equipment. Even in high school science class, if you'd gotten such widely varied results, you'd know you did something wrong.

WOW, that's wrong. Vino never tested positive for steroids! He tested positive for using someone else's blood. Jeez, please don't draw conclusions on events for which you've not even gotten the facts.

That margin of error is beyond bad but don't believe for a second that facts will get in the way of a witch hunt. As for using steroids to enhance performance. Some people are (silently) alleging that there is only way for cyclists us use "steroids" (there is only one type too?) and all cyclists must therefore use it the same way.

I was almost surprised that USADA didn't try a dunk test during their "hearing."

Interesting article. Hope things turn around for him.

I found the article very interesting and am also in the process of reading the book. But from a reality standpoint you have to basically accept the "fact" that Landis has already served a years suspension regardless of the final outcome of the hearing, which I find very hard to accept "if" he is found to be not guilty...

It is this particular brand of insightful analysis that brings me back to BF time and again. F Sam Abt and the NYTimes.


Funny, I was thinking the same about you.

http://www.natural-health-information-centre.com/image-files/head-in-sand.jpg

For those who don't have their heads in the sand, here's a transcript of an instant message chat between Jonathan Vaughters and Frankie Andreu that was submitted as an exhibit in that court case Armstong settled with his insurers out of court. The transcript is easily found on google.


Cyclevaughters: frankie – hey – thanks for talking the other day

FDREU: no problem, where are you

CV: back in CO

FA: nice, I just got home, isn’t it like 5am

CV: sometimes I think I’m going to go nuts
yeah
its 5am

FA: I agree, I came home and the air conditioning is broken

CV: ouch

FA: did your kid grow twice its size in the two weeks you were gone

CV: yeah, his feet look bigger for some [r]eason

FA: funny

CV: anyhow, i can never quite figure out why i don’t just play along with the lance crowd-i mean **** it would make my life easier, eh? its not like I never played with hotsauce, eh?
FA: I know, but in the end i don’t think it comes back to bite you
I play along, my wife does not, and Lance hates us both it’s a no win situation, you know how he is. Once you leave the team or do something wrong you forever banned

CV: i suppose-you know he tried to hire me back in 2001…he was nice to me…i just couldn’t deal with that world

FA: I did not know that
look at why everyone leaves, it’s way to controlling

CV: once I went to CA and saw that now [not] all the teams got 25 injections every day,I felt really guilty
hell, CA was ZERO

FA: you mean all the riders

CV: Credit Agricole

FA: it’s crazy

CV: So, I realized lance was full of sh*t when he’d said everyone was doing it.

FA: You may read stuff i say to radio or press, praising the Tour and lance but it’s just playing the game

CV: believe me, as crazy as it sounds-Moreau was on nothing. Het of 39%

FA: when in 2000-2001

CV: so, that’s when you start thinking…hell, Kevin was telling me that after 2000 Ullrich never raced over 42%-yeah moreau in 2000-2001
Anyhow-whtever

FA: After 1999, you know many things changed. lance did not
I believe that’s part of whey Kevin left, he was tired of the stuff

CV: funniest thing i ever heard-Johan and Lance dumped Floyd’s rest day blood refill down the toilet in front of him in last yrs tour to make him ride bad

FA: holy sh*t, I never heard that. that’s craz!!

CV: that’s from floyd
he rode this year with no extra blood

FA: I never knew
he did great also

CV: yeah, i could explain the whole way lance dupes everyone

FA: what about GH climbing the mountains better than azevado and the entire group

CV: from how floyd described it, i know exactly the metho[d]

FA: explain that, classics to climber
when did you talk with floyd

CV: i don’t know-I want trust George
but the thing is on that team, you think it’s
normal
or at least I did

FA: i guess. anything with blood is not normal

CV: yeah, its very complex how [to] avoid all the controls now, but it’s not any new drug or anything, just the resources and the planning to pull of a well devised plan
it’s why they all got dropped on stage 9-no refill yet-then on the rest day-boom 800ml of packed cells

FA: they have it mastered. good point.

CV: they draw the blood right after the dauphine

FA: how do they sneak it in, or keep it until needed i’m sure it’s not with the truck in the frig

CV: motorcycle-refrigerated panniers
on the rest day
floyd has a photo of the thing

FA: crazy! It’s just keep going to new levels

CV: yeah, it’s complicated, but with enough money you can do it

FA: they have enough money. Floyd was so p*ssed at the entire tour

CV: anyhow-i feel sorry for floyd and some of the other guys
why would lance keep doing the sh*t when he clearly has nothing to prove-it’s weird

FA: I know. me to. they all get ripped into for no reason
he’s done now, thank god. but they will prove next year or Johan’s sake that they are the greatest

CV: and then lance says “this guy and that guy are *******”

FA: they won’t stop
i agree

CV: then i’ve got tiger one of my sponsors, and he loves to pick my mind…what do I say?

FA: You play dumb.
You can’t talk with them about this stuff
I would think they would freak

CV: yeah, that’s tough-i do, but its tough
maybe they should freak
what about dan osipow or louise? do they
know what’s up?

FA: I know, I get tired of hearing how great Lance is, what a super person etc. it’s crazy and it’s hard to not just tell people he is a cheat and assh*le I think not. they just run the team. They are never allowed in a hotel or bus or anything

CV: every other team in the tour you could just walk right on to their bus and say hi
but disco won’t let dan on?
all right

FA: my kids are waking up, I gotta run. Let’s talk some more later

CV: i’ve had enough-I’m glad to be home-hopefully this won’t affect my team or my kids

FA: I agree

CV: that’s all I care about

FA: ciao

CV: see ya

I'm sold! Floyd and the rest of the gang have taught me you have to sacrifice for the things you love. These performance enhancing drugs sound really great! Where can I, a fat 42 year old nonprofessional rider, get them? Do they have performance enhancing drugs for upper-mid-level-managment bureaucrats? I mean besides coffee and sweet delicious donuts? I'd like something to help me boost my rec ride speed average from 13 to 15 mph and help me keep a clear hear around tax time. Hook a brother up, pretty please.
;)

I'm sold! Floyd and the rest of the gang have taught me you have to sacrifice for the things you love. These performance enhancing drugs sound really great! Where can I, a fat 42 year old nonprofessional rider, get them? Do they have performance enhancing drugs for upper-mid-level-managment bureaucrats? I mean besides coffee and sweet delicious donuts? I'd like something to help me boost my rec ride speed average from 13 to 15 mph and help me keep a clear hear around tax time. Hook a brother up, pretty please.
;)

:lol:

Actually, if you look at the lab's numbers, they didn't reproduce the 11:1 ratio even on the same sample. When they tested his sample the first time, they did two tests (this is normal) and got the following results:

Test 1: 61.37 T, 5.2 Epi
Test 2: 172.23 T, 17.59 Epi

By their own rules, that large of an error margin meant the tests were invalid and likely there was contamination or miscalibration of the equipment. Even in high school science class, if you'd gotten such widely varied results, you'd know you did something wrong.



WOW, that's wrong. Vino never tested positive for steroids! He tested positive for using someone else's blood. Jeez, please don't draw conclusions on events for which you've not even gotten the facts.

C'mon, Doc's my favorite poster. But you beat me to it regarding a response.

You will hear crickets (http://www.naturesongs.com/cricket1.wav) for a while....

Proof of this: the positive result for steroids by Vinokourov. When Landis was positive, there were hundreds of opinions of why it was not possible because steroids were not beneficial. Yet, Vinokourov gets the same result, and he's guilty.


Incorrect. (http://www.cyclingnews.com/road/2007/tour07/news/?id=/news/2007/jul07/jul25news2) And laughable. And he didn't get the same result.

...never mind...nothing to see here. Move along...

Funny, I was thinking the same about you.

http://www.natural-health-information-centre.com/image-files/head-in-sand.jpg

And let's not forget the sophmoric humor.

I am decidedly undecided about FL. Whatever he may be he certainly hangs out with dirtbags and doesn't know how to keep his mouth shut. Of course neither of those facts means that he doped, despite the USADA's contention otherwise. There is a positive result but the quality of the lab work is suspect. At least my wife, a chemistry prof, thinks so. What I read doesn't seem right to me either but as a history teacher I'll concede my wife knows a bit more in this area.

This delay smacks of politics for sure though. Either they didn't want to release another doping story during the TdF or they're going to find not guilty but are hoping if they delay the release Dick Pound and the ASO won't go quite as ballistic. Fat chance that.

I'm not a believer in conspiracies (there was noone on the grassy knoll) but it's getting easier to believe that the USADA is trying to implement a de facto suspension here. Wait a year + then find not guilty based on inconclusive evidence, knowing full well that the appeal to the CAS will eat up most or all of the 2nd year.


:beer:

Doc's response... (http://www.naturesongs.com/cricket1.wav)

Hey, if Doc didn't make up the information, it wouldn't be as entertaining.

Wait, Floyd and Doc have something in common!

I hate to say it, but I am starting to think Floyd got a bum rap. If he is incontrovertibly guilty, then he would have been found guilty by now. If he is guilty, let's see a verdict somewhere other than the court of public opinion. I think what likely happened is like Vino this year, he got the wrong bloodbag, or it was tainted. Nonetheless, let's see some proof. Until then, I am rethinking my response to all this.

I hate to say it, but I am starting to think Floyd got a bum rap. If he is incontrovertibly guilty, then he would have been found guilty by now. If he is guilty, let's see a verdict somewhere other than the court of public opinion. I think what likely happened is like Vino this year, he got the wrong bloodbag, or it was tainted. Nonetheless, let's see some proof. Until then, I am rethinking my response to all this.


+100

For those who don't have their heads in the sand, here's a transcript of an instant message chat between Jonathan Vaughters and Frankie Andreu that was submitted as an exhibit in that court case Armstong settled with his insurers out of court. The transcript is easily found on google.


Cyclevaughters: frankie – hey – thanks for talking the other day

Incriminating conversation.


I haven't read this before but my first thought is that this is not a legitimate conversation. I mean, they transition way to quickly from talking about their kids to talking immediately about doping. I have never seen a parent talk about their kid for less than 20 minutes after being directly asked. I don't know, just seems fishy.

I haven't read this before but my first thought is that this is not a legitimate conversation. I mean, they transition way to quickly from talking about their kids to talking immediately about doping. I have never seen a parent talk about their kid for less than 20 minutes after being directly asked. I don't know, just seems fishy.

Well read Frankie Andreaus, website, he basicly states that everything stated is true.

First these guys aren't calling each other because of their kids, they are both pro-cyclists, and they are talking about their job.

Second this still doesn't shed any light on whether Floyd is guilty or innocent.

classic1, while that Vaughters-Andreu IM conversation is interesting it is also irrelevant to anything to do with the case- in fact it suggests that Landis was doping in a manner not alleged rather than backing up the allegations of testosterone use.

If Landis was doping as the transcript suggests then that is absolutely no reason to get careless with the testing of his samples. In fact, in light of this transcript, it makes the idiocy of the case against him more of a travesty. If Landis is guilty (as shown in this IM) then the lab and testing officials risked letting him off by screwing up the process.

Tekhna, do you realize what happens when a person gets "the wrong bloodbag"? They generally don't get away with just testing positive- they often get a stay in the hospital and possibly die. You see when a person with A type blood gets B type blood the body attacks the transfused blood and creates cellular problems. There is also a problem with getting the wrong Rh (+/-).

Passing off mixing up bloodbags as just a simple mistake is rather dishonest. There are several different blood/Rh types and some of those just don't mix. Anyone messing around with blood transfusions is really careful about screwing that up or they die soon. Ever notice how hospitals are rather careful about typing and cross-typing blood before transfusions?

It is important to distinguish actual guilt (whether he did the crime) from provable guilt (whether we can prove it). In this case, regardless of actual guilt of doping, USADA failed to prove their case and had to rely on weak secondary "evidence." USADA was unfortunately put in a awful position by the screw ups in France (testing, leaking, and publicity) in a front stage case. Instead of being honest about the weakness of the case and backing down they proceeded with it and turned their own hearing into a joke.

The outcome of this case is pretty irrelevant to everyone besides Landis because everyone else loses equally for whichever verdict.

Will we know the winner of the '08 TdF before we know the winner of the '06?

Well read Frankie Andreaus, website, he basicly states that everything stated is true.

First these guys aren't calling each other because of their kids, they are both pro-cyclists, and they are talking about their job.

Second this still doesn't shed any light on whether Floyd is guilty or innocent.

Well that makes it certain. Andreau has a website and verifies his own statements. I guess Andreau can't lie and therefore we should believe his website.

Well that makes it certain. Andreau has a website and verifies his own statements. I guess Andreau can't lie and therefore we should believe his website.

He didn't report this conversation in the first place, he just verified it.

He also didn't write Walsh's book L.A confidential, but he verified everything in that book he had knowledge of, was 100 percent true.


Frankie Andreau, had nothing to gain at all by coming out and speaking on this, He wasn't selling a book or promoting himself, in fact he lost his job at Team Toyota over this and various endorsement deals.

Everyone I know who has dealings with the Andreau family, has always known them to be above board people.

Tekhna, do you realize what happens when a person gets "the wrong bloodbag"? They generally don't get away with just testing positive- they often get a stay in the hospital and possibly die. You see when a person with A type blood gets B type blood the body attacks the transfused blood and creates cellular problems. There is also a problem with getting the wrong Rh (+/-).

Passing off mixing up bloodbags as just a simple mistake is rather dishonest. There are several different blood/Rh types and some of those just don't mix. Anyone messing around with blood transfusions is really careful about screwing that up or they die soon. Ever notice how hospitals are rather careful about typing and cross-typing blood before transfusions?


I understand the biology of it. What I meant by that was it seems probable that what happened was between stages 16 and 17 Floyd injected his own packed cells, not realizing they still had leftover testosterone in them. Likely from pre-season, when they would have been using testosterone. Testosterone doesn't make any sense during a race, particularly knowing how he was going to be subjected to such rigorous testing. It seems more likely that he just got a bag of his own, tainted blood. But they screwed the pooch on this one, so how the hell are we ever going know?

He didn't report this conversation in the first place, he just verified it.

He also didn't write Walsh's book L.A confidential, but he verified everything in that book he had knowledge of, was 100 percent true.


Frankie Andreau, had nothing to gain at all by coming out and speaking on this, He wasn't selling a book or promoting himself, in fact he lost his job at Team Toyota over this and various endorsement deals.

Everyone I know who has dealings with the Andreau family, has always known them to be above board people.

and? What exactly does this have to do with the price of tea in china?

First off, I was merely appalled by the "logic" of the argument. Andreau has a website? So do the Nigerian scammers so merely having a website that says that you verify something is meaningless. Do you believe everything you read on the internets?

Second, your second assertion about actual dealings with the Andreau family is a lot more meaningful- why didn't you lead with that? Generally I would suggest that this is made up but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt- unless you verify it on you website, then I would believe you.

Third, this IM has nothing to do with the testosterone doping case against Landis and the subsequent fall out that the OP article was about. It's a red herring. Interesting but pointless.

I haven't read this before but my first thought is that this is not a legitimate conversation. I mean, they transition way to quickly from talking about their kids to talking immediately about doping. I have never seen a parent talk about their kid for less than 20 minutes after being directly asked. I don't know, just seems fishy.

It reads like awkward expositional dialogue meant to be read by other parties. I don't trust the validity of this exchange.

I understand the biology of it. What I meant by that was it seems probable that what happened was between stages 16 and 17 Floyd injected his own packed cells, not realizing they still had leftover testosterone in them. Likely from pre-season, when they would have been using testosterone. Testosterone doesn't make any sense during a race, particularly knowing how he was going to be subjected to such rigorous testing. It seems more likely that he just got a bag of his own, tainted blood. But they screwed the pooch on this one, so how the hell are we ever going know?



I hate to say it, but I am starting to think Floyd got a bum rap. If he is incontrovertibly guilty, then he would have been found guilty by now. If he is guilty, let's see a verdict somewhere other than the court of public opinion. I think what likely happened is like Vino this year, he got the wrong bloodbag, or it was tainted. Nonetheless, let's see some proof. Until then, I am rethinking my response to all this.

You said "I think what likely happened is like Vino this year, he got the wrong bloodbag,..." Are you suggesting that Vino happened to get the wrong blood bag with someone else's blood in it, survived unharmed and then tested positive for homologous blood doping? He got off lucky then. Given the biological risk of screwing up your body I can't imagine the riders, doctors and helpers allowing screw ups.

I also like that you shoot down USADA's assertion (made during the hearing by Papp) with "Testosterone doesn't make any sense during a race." So is USADA now making stuff up or just oddly mistaken in your opinion ?