Professional Cycling For the Fans - What are people's thoughts on Floyd these days??

The story above is probably true. He seems to be a user.

--Pun very much intended.


I don't why anyone has any patience with him anymore. The guy really has a really a lot of balls to whine about politics in cycling recently --as if it could explain why he likely won't ride the Tour de France anymore. He's a cheat who got caught. He lost during a protracted appeals process where he and his team of guys showed their true colors... And still he refuses to admit any wrongdoing. What a jerk.

i hear you. very reminiscent of tyler hamilton who was also "victimized" by the systeme.

"There are a lot of bad people out there who have done some bad things to me. Cycling … I think it’s everywhere, but there is a mafia in cycling. That’s pretty much all I’ll say about it, I’ll probably get banned from a race if I say any more, but there is a mafia out there. "

-- Tyler Hamilton

Jack Bauer is beating Floyd Landis: http://ca.sports.yahoo.com/sc/news?slug=ap-newzealand-landis&prov=ap&type=lgns

99.999% of the world is more like it

i don't think he's any cleaner or dirtier than the next top pro. he just got caught is all. go flandis!


140 and 5'10 doesnt seem chubby to me? I met him at the Cascade Cycling Classic this summer and he is rail thin. None the les he's still better then 99.999999% of all the people on this forum.

99.999% of the world is more like it

i don't think he's any cleaner or dirtier than the next top pro. he just got caught is all. go flandis!

For sure! Go floyd!

Lets add this gem to the already impressive list of flimsy/inaccurate pro-Landis argument.
Sorry, it is neither flimsy nor inaccurate. Read the transcripts.


Ooops. I see Trakhak went the extra mile. Thanks!

Sorry, it is neither flimsy nor inaccurate. Read the transcripts.
*shrug*

You could also read the panel's conclusion. IIRC the panel concluded that the lab did make a few errors, but these were not significant enough protocol violations to void the adverse finding. And the CAS -- which has in fact overturned rulings on the basis of protocol violations -- summarily shut down Floyd's appeal.

I won't necessarily say it was a "flimsy excuse;" the lab has an obligation to follow protocol and to handle samples carefully. But I don't see it as terribly compelling either. Looks like the panel & CAS didn't either.

Here is my question on a bit of a tangent:

What do the national ADA's or WADA or even CAS have to gain by allowing someone off the hook based on bad procedures or ethics by the labs?

Here is my question on a bit of a tangent:

What do the national ADA's or WADA or even CAS have to gain by allowing someone off the hook based on bad procedures or ethics by the labs?

moral authority

Honestly I don't really know enough about the whole situation and to be honest again I just don't really care about it all that much. If he doped and tried to cover it up; shame on him. But he served out the penalty so now we can hopefully get over it. If he didn't dope and tried to cover it up --- oops.

If Vino, the epitome of all things bad in cycling, can make a return with a Tour winning team, why can't Landis? He's done his time, let him have a shot. How is he any different from Basso, or Vino, or Valverde? So he complained... Give the man a break. If I had a TdF title taken away from me then I would make excuses to the point that I looked like an idiot too. Let the man race his race.

If Vino, the epitome of all things bad in cycling, can make a return with a Tour winning team, why can't Landis? He's done his time, let him have a shot. How is he any different from Basso, or Vino, or Valverde? So he complained... Give the man a break. If I had a TdF title taken away from me then I would make excuses to the point that I looked like an idiot too. Let the man race his race.

Because Vinokourov is a star in Kazakhstan and he has connections, and thus $$$ (or at least intermittently). Landis is just an athlete with no star appeal.

True under the assumption that he was knowingly guilty.

But his statements are also entirely consistent with someone who knows himself to be innocent and is naive enough to think that the system will eventually clear him.


Up until he tried to blackmail Lemond out of testifying.
LNDD didn't have a convincing labwork.
But an innocent wouldn't try exposing Lemond's past as a way of intimidating him.

OK, here's what happened. He signed a one year deal with the devil to ride for OUCH because they fixed his hip for a rock bottom price. He thinks the team is full of scrubs not worth his empty water bottle so he figures "I'm going to throw out the boat anchor for a year and come back to tear it up in 2010 on a different team." I kid, I kid. I like the guy.


What heart.

You've gotta have heart, all you really need is heart.
Oh it's fine to be genius of course, but keep that old horse before the cart....:roflmao2:

Up until he tried to blackmail Lemond out of testifying.
LNDD didn't have a convincing labwork.
But an innocent wouldn't try exposing Lemond's past as a way of intimidating him.


1) Landis didn't try the blackmail Lemond

2) The lab work was shoddy at best (and I think Landis was guilty)

3) Lemond exposed his own past.

1) Landis didn't try the blackmail Lemond

2) The lab work was shoddy at best (and I think Landis was guilty)

3) Lemond exposed his own past.

The timing of calling Lemond the night before his testimony and discussing child moletsting is an implicit threat at exposing Lemond's victimization to the public, pasrticularly given Landis' earlier postings that if Lemond didn't shutup things were going to come out Lemond wouldn't want to come out.

Shoddy is an understatement. They were so inept they couldn't get close results from both samples. The B sample should never be performed at the same lab, it should be done at an independent lab. Notice the French Open Tennis Tournament recognized how bad the domestic LNDD was that they outsourced their testing to Canada's lab.

Lemond told about his victimization in confidence to Floyd. The history was tightly held, it was not out in the public before the Landis hearing.

Yeah I think Floyd was guilty of doping because an innocent would not have had his aid call up and intimidate the witness. It wouldn't surprise me if he was innocent of doping with what they accused him of but guilty of some other doping offense they missed.

O, now I see where you coming from on this issue...sorry to waste my time.

Just announced that he has left OUCH as he wants to race in Europe ...

Will any of the TdF-confirmed teams take him up?

Just announced that he has left OUCH as he wants to race in Europe ...

Will any of the TdF-confirmed teams take him up?

Silence-Lotto.

Just announced that he has left OUCH as he wants to race in Europe ...

Will any of the TdF-confirmed teams take him up?

Not if they want to remain 'TdF-confirmed teams'.

He cheated. He did his time. I like him as a person from what I have seen. I have moved on.

He cheated. He did his time. I like him as a person from what I have seen. I have moved on.

I hope the man gets his act together. Surely he can do better than finish in the bottom half in local crits!

Not if they want to remain 'TdF-confirmed teams'.

They let Millar back in, Vino looks like he's in, Basso is in, there are also several other individuals from "Operation Puerto" that ride with teams like Caisse de Pargne and other members fron "Liberty Seguros" that are riding. Didn't Alberto ride with those guys and was thought to be involved with "Operation Puerto?" People like Floyd deserve a second chance but is he really at that level is the question.

go flandis!

BMC. At least that was my thought when I read he was quitting OUCH.

As far as the others:
Millar admitted doping.
Basso admitted to thinking of doping, kinda sorta an admittance.
Heck, even Virenque did.
Ditto Riis, Zabel, and a bunch of other guys currently involved in the pro peloton.

Vino hasn't admitted, but has a lot of money/pull behind him.
Neither has Tyler.

Floyd hasn't either.

I think that puts him in the second boat, not the first one.

Personally I think he probably doped, but I also think his T:E ratio should have shown nothing, and therefore he shouldn't have gotten penalized. I think the T:E ratios were all over the place, from 1.8:1 to 11:1 (or something like that). A variance greater than a certain number calls for ALL the test samples to be thrown out (based on doping rules). Floyd's numbers exceeded that variance by a lot.

So I think he should have been found "innocent" on technical terms.

I also don't think he necessarily juiced up for that one stage.

My take on "following the rules" in cases like his:
http://sprinterdellacasa.blogspot.com/2007/04/doping-floyds-b-samples-non-negative.html

Some other doping thoughts (I have a lot of them so I'm limiting it to just one link):
http://sprinterdellacasa.blogspot.com/2008/07/doping-standards-apply-to-everyone.html

cdr

My thoughts on Floyd Landis?

I had a bet of 85 euro at 180/1 on Oscar Pereiro-Sio to win the 2006 Tour de France, a possible 15,000 euro payout.
The payout was one who stands on the podium in Paris as the winner.


I am not a fan of Floyd Landis.