roadwarrior

besides...

Trevor98

This doctor's credibility is irrelevant to the case. Either what he says is true, and thus shown in the paperwork, or it's not. I would like to see a video of the lab representative defending the (admitted) mistakes and squirming in front of the USADA, Landis, and his lawyer. IF such a mistake was made and the case blown due to lab incompetence then the fans and sponsors should make their displeasure known (the riders and teams are in a no win situation). IF accusations resulted from such incompetent lab work then Landis should sue everyone responsible into the poor house. Either way, screwing up a doping case like this is simply unacceptable.

donrhummy

The problem is twofold:

1. Cyling would rather the winner of their premier event was caught doping than have to admit that their doping controls are unprofessional at best and intentionally corrupt at worst. They don't want to have to admit a mistake or wrongdoing, i.e. take a black eye. they'd rather Floyd get a black eye and they get a bruise for catching a black sheep amongst them.

2. EVEN IF Floyd somehow wins his case with US Cycling, he still has to win in the French case. They do not have the same "innocent until proven guilty" mentality in their publis, nor is their public as receptive towards the American Floyd who may have been screwed by a FRENCH lab.

he's fighting an uphill battle and regardless of whether he should get off or not, he's actually got a less than 50% chance of winning.

caligurl

why's that, volty**********??? did you miss your morning coffee????

Trevor98

I don't think a contrary French decision will stand at CAS. IF the USADA clears Landis because the evidence against him is dubious and they, representing the USAC, have jurisdiction over his suspension then it follows that CAS must harmonize the two decisions. CAS is pretty fair and would likely respect the USADA's ruling. If it doesn't then the system deserves to wither and fail. Fans deserve better and generally don't like such confusing rulings (ie Floyd is cleared but can't race in France).

I do agree that the face-saving in cycling is ridiculous. Cycling officials seem to worry about saving face most after they screw up the PR effort. I believe that after the initial leak the UCI and WADA (to include the LNDD lab) were trapped into the accusation.

Regardless of the outcome of this case and OP cycling suffers.

donrhummy

Really? What about unibet?

Trevor98

Unibet's problems with ASO is about interpreting French law. As far as I know that matter has not be decided upon by CAS so I really don't understand your question. Time and future decisions will settle the matter one way or another and bringing Unibet's predicament it up at this juncture is just pointless.

oilman_15106

Should anyone be surprised that the positive tests will continue to be found until a French rider is awarded the yellow jersey.

gurana

I mostly agree with this post, but I don't feel that the American public mentality is any more geared towards 'Innocent until proven guilty' than anywhere else in the world. True, our Justice system behaves according to this presumption of innocence, but not necessarily our public. In fact, actual verdicts have very little to do with the American public's assumption of guilt or innocence.

rule

It's amazing though how much money goes into all of this for there to apparently be so little integrity throughout the entire structure and process. From top to bottom, all concerned should be kicked to the curb so that people with some character and ethics can take the reigns. And any lab that performs its work in such an inept manner should lose all accreditation as well.

What a waste.

patentcad

No worries then. This is FRANCE. Shoot 'em first, ask questions - F it, no questions.

ezoons

Your father was a hamster, and your mother smelt of elderberries.

DCist

"Dr Arnie Baker is a friend and staunch defender of Tour de France winner Floyd Landis."

I almost stopped reading right there. Beware Dr. Baker and his Power Point presentation. *yawn*

roadwarrior

The "public's perception" is based on what people read (if they can read) in the first two sentences of a newspaper article, written by someone with a personal agenda passing off their work as "fact" (aka a "journalist").

Lucky07

I'm no lab technician, but you would think DNA is available in urine. Shouldn't that have been sorted out long ago?

donrhummy

I know a lot of people have been saying that they don't believe any of the stuff because the guy presenting the info is Floyd's friend. But I think the most telling thing is Andy Rihs' recent actions.

Remember when Rihs threw Landis under the bus after the TDF? He said that what Landis had done ruined the team. He basically said Landis was a doper, liar, etc. And now? After all the info Landis' legal/medical team has collected? He seems to be singing a diff. tune. Looks as though he now believes Landis is innocent. Hmmmm....

https://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?...r07/mar05news2

skinny

Baker is from San Diego and is Floyd's wing man on his defense team. He is not an unbiased observer in this process. While he is a doctor and a cyclist with some success, he is also an author and another of the people in the training industry. He has a vested interest in the exposure he receives from this case. I'm not saying what he is right or wrong. Just saying that like us all, he has interests here.

neilwheel

I've said this elsewhere, but I'm going to say it again. This latest installment in the "Lloyd Flanders is Innocent" saga is just so much smoke and mirrors. Now they're trying to suggest the sample wasn't his. Fine, just one small problem there. Roll the tape right back to the beginning, to the bit when the results of the test were first made public.
Flanders was questioned about the presence of drugs in the sample for combatting a thyroid condition (hypothyroidism) (which have the side-effect of raising testosterone production, its secretion and elevating the metabolic rate of the patient). Flanders claimed that the presence of the drug was covered by a certificate claiming he indeed had a thyroid condition that he was being treated for. So, inadvertently, he claimed ownership of the sample! Now, we're being taken down a blind alley by a defense that first tries to say "'yes, the sample is mine, but there's a pefectly good explanation for the performance-enhancing drugs found there", later they claim that he has naturally high testosterone only for it to be shown that the testosterone in the sample comes from a synthetic source; now the claim is "it wasn't my sample, I never did it, honest!"

Expect the phantom twin to make an appearance any day now...

eandmwilson

^^ uh, Flandis? So easy to missidentify someone or something, huh?

Hambone

we shouldn't find the name of the other rider!

That is the whole point of why what the lab did is (in my mind) so egregious. There are protections so this stuff can be resolved before it is public and everybody has their knickers in a bunch.