Why hasn't the gaping hole in Floyd's story been addressed?
 

I've been waiting to find an article addressing what happened before/during Stage 17 in 2006.

Do people really not care about this? I see it as step 1 in his "coming clean".

Pathetic how Novitsky is going after guys who never tested positive BEFORE figuring out what the hell happened with the one guy who did.

I disagree that this represents a "hole" in his story as it really has nothing to do with what he did at US Postal or what's going on in cycling now, but I hope too that he comes clean with that at some point and just faces the consequences, whatever they are.

Landis has addressed this numerous times. Were you not paying attention or do you just want to him to say what you want to hear?

He has addressed it, but not in a way that makes any sense imo.

Umm, to answer your question about why it hasn't been addressed...umm, it already has been addressed.

And another thing. You twisted it as if it were some secret conspirary thing. It's not. No hole either. Except the hole in your theory that Novitsky is only going after guys who NEVER tested positive. I know you ain't talking about Armstrong when you say that.

You seem to misunderstand what the thrust of the federal investigation is about. It's not so much about doping as other laws broken in relation to the doping. Fraud, tax evasion, racketeering, misuse of federal monies. The reality is that the feds are trying to find the source from where the drugs flow and if Armstrong used federal monies to illegally advance his career.

Landis has already had his TDF victory taken away along with being financially bankrupt and his life destroyed. All the while Lance gets away with a more sophisticated doping and drug method and is sitting on millions of dollars and continues to ride the tide of success and positive public opinion when there is enough evidence against him to convict him in any court of law. So you think that they should continue to go after Landis when he is helping the investigation?

Total witch hunt. To say it's not about doping is ridiculous. Floyd's site is down in apparent shame.

Ahh! Hanging your hopes on the "witch hunt" theory. I bet you read all the Armstrong twitter and press releases too, huh? :lol:

As to the fundamental motivation you may be right. But it hardly matters if they have other legally legitimate avenues to go after him with.

Who knows, perhaps Lance really is a witch.

That's a pretty funny picture of Armstrong doing the Hook'em Horns. He never even went to the Univ of Texas. As a matter of fact, he never even went to college. Figures as much though. Dude barely has any intelligence to go with that total lack of class. The careers, businesses, and lives this guy has ruined. And making millions off cancer patients. Hope they clean up the sport starting with throwing him in prison for a long, long time.

If you actually live in Austin then how are your surprised by the Hook'em Horns. Either a ton of people Austin went to UT or there are a lot of people that dress in UT gear because they like the football team. People like the big state schools and I would theorize that the more gear someone owns to the top public universities (UT, UNC, Michigan, UC Berkeley) the less likely it is that they went there.

I'm no Armstrong fan, but you've got to give the devil his due. You don't get where he's gotten without some intelligence. He's turned being a winning cyclist into a worldwide brand in a way that's never been done before, and made tens of millions for himself in the process.

Sometimes I think he can be his own worst enemy, but he's not stupid.

And how do you think he's been able to orchestrate a systematic program of doping, without getting nailed for it (at least until now), while all his major challengers were getting caught, without something on the ball?

OMG! Are you serious?! How did he NOT get busted for doping in 1999? EPO that is? How? I'll tell you how. Money talks. The UCI knows it. Money drives the sport. Money lines the pockets of the UCI prez. And money funds doping.

Now, you tell me how the guy at the top, who is making millions off of cancer patients, is incapable of pressuring other riders to dope?! He's already shown that is he capable of ruining other people's business, rider's livlihoods, families, etc. A hero? Not in my book. Maybe yours though.

I do not know if LA doped or not. One of Landis' allegation, though, is that LA had prior knowledge of testing protocols. This allegation, if true, infers that there is a corrupt individual(s) within the UCI who fed the ins/outs of the testing protocols to LA and possibly others.

How does he get busted in 1999? With no test for EPO available, how does anyone prove he was using it.

How does Armstrong NOT get busted when he, in fact, DID test positive in 2005 via retroactive testing that was not available in 1999! Just because he got off on some horrendous lies and technicalities does not mean he has never tested positive.

Armstrong puppets like to claim that he is the most tested mammal on earth, and that he never tested positive for anything other than hope, but this is blatantly false.

You know, I am smart enough to know that I don't know if Armstrong doped or not, having said that it boggles my mind how anyone can look at the information available about the 1999 samples and claim that they know LA was doping and that those samples are definitive proof. "Lies and technicalities?!?!?!" Last time I checked it was facts and testing protocols. The sad part is that people who have so much obsessive hate for LA are willing to see things that aren't even there, ignore facts that don't fit and attack and insult anyone who does not agree with everything they say.

Moving the goalposts. *yawn*

That's because you are a casual fan who only joined the forum to be a mouthpiece for Armstrong. I think you don't know much about science behind the retroactive tests. Do you even know what retroactive means? Do a search on EPO dope methods, scientific research testing protocols for drug testing, and basically more homework. Enlighten yourself. I see how it could boggle your mind since you can't look at the information without any knowledge on what was tested and how or really why Armstrong would want to conceal that.

Let me translate for you:

You didn't agree with me so I must try to insult you

You don't agree with me so I must try to insult you.

I have no intelligent retort so I will say nothing and attempt to insult you again.

Thanks bellweatherman for doing an excellent job of proving what I said.

P.S.- Your assertions about me could not be farther from the truth.

Good post.

In case you hadn't noticed, the OP specifically restricted the time to 1999 and the PED to EPO. So whatever you might think about 2005 really isn't relevant.

As to why he wasn't sanctioned in 2005, the rules in place in 2005 required cofirmation via a B sample. Since there weren't any B samples of the urine collected in 1999 available, there was no way to sanction anyone. (It also means the requirement for a scientifically recognized test doesn't have to be addressed.)

Huh? Article please.

Landis says he doped all the time, but not in 2006 on Stage 17 with testosterone. We should take his word for it? Nobody's tried to dig any deeper?

The main reason why the Feds don't care about this is that there is no US crime committed. Landis's allegation have led to an investigation of potential US Federal crimes. Compare this investigation to the BALCO case where there was a drug distribution ring and the Feds broke the ring and revealed it with the use of their powers.

I think the allegations against Armstrong/Bruyneel and Tailwind appear to be of this sort. On the other hand, Landis admitted to basically a solo operation with Phonak and being part of the broader ring in Discovery. He may plead guilty to crimes associated with being part of the ring. However, if his allegations are true, then others are the big fish as far as the feds are concerned.

As far as how I feel specifically about Landis's claims that he didn't take testosterone on that specific stage, I would tend to not really care. He's admitted to doping leading up to and during the Tour, so no claim could be made to make him the legitimate winner again. His credibility is already tarnished by his previous lying so a minor point such as this seems to not really matter. Could you explain why it would matter why it would matter whether he took testosterone on that day given that he admits to taking HGH and blood doping before and during the tour?

Because I think he's still lying. Implicating Armstrong and others on US Postal by admitting to blood doping benefits him financially. Admitting to using testosterone and confirming the legitimacy of the Stage 17 test does not.

If he would just admit to the testosterone, he'd have some credibility. Right now he has zero. That's why it matters.