Floyd Landis speaks...

[ridebikeme]

Well, like many of you I find this very upsetting. And if the truth be known, i truly did believe in the innocence of Tyler.

At any rate, after reading all of these emails, emails that were posted by Radioshak... it still does not set very well with me. There's still something that is missing from all of this.( at least that is what my gut tells me) I thought about this alot today, while walking the dogs, work, and then doing yoga tonight. The one thing that keeps popping in my head is why did Frankie Andreau, Greg Lemond and now Floyd all accuse Lance of doping? All at different times, but still the threat is there. Truly I want to believe that Lance is clean and that this is a misunderstanding, jealously or whatever... but the fact remains that many many cyclists have cheated and have for many years. How is it that a "clean" cyclist could compete and conquer against these people for so long? Obviously he has always had a very strong team, but is his strong will and strong team the only reason?

I don't know the answer(s), but what I do hope for is that the truth comes out, and that all of the doping procedures be reevaluated and all members of a team, director, cyclists, massage therapist, etc... be strongly evaluated as well. Whether now or sometime in the future, the truth will come out and I hope that the rest of the sporting world is listening and taking notes.

[tiva]

Doping has a long, long history in cycling. The wikipedia article is pretty amazing: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...ses_in_cycling

From the very beginning of cycle racing, doping has been a big part of it. Doping wasn't even outlawed in racing until the 1960s. In 1930, doping was so accepted that the organizers of the Tour de France warned racers that they'd have to bring their own drugs; the tour organizers weren't going to be giving them away for free anymore.

I'm not saying doping is safe--look at all the racers who have died from bad drugs. But it's part of the sport and it always has been, so why not just regulate it for professional racers, making it safer and fairer? That way, most racers wouldn't get an advantage that the very few people who abide by the rules don't get. Cycle racing could become like cross-country ski racing (which has separate races for classic technique, and for the much faster skate technique--faster, but for a while, outlawed.) Divide races into two classes: drugged and undrugged. Let racers chose which class they want to race in, and let doctors regulate the drugging so it stops killing racers.

[OakLeaf]

I like Andy Borowitz's interpretation...

[TrekTheKaty]

Oakleaf, that's hilarious

[TrekTheKaty]

tiva, this was a good article.

I was discussing Floyd with a friend who is a chemist. I asked why no one had died from messing around with drugs--but apparently they have!

[itself]

Let's think about this. The Tour de France is a 21 day event. These guys ride at top speeds for over one hundred miles each day...

NONE of them are clean. Physically impossible to do this event at this level and be clean.

[Skierchickie]

Cycle racing could become like cross-country ski racing (which has separate races for classic technique, and for the much faster skate technique--faster, but for a while, outlawed.)

Actually, the skating technique just came along relatively recently - I don't think it was ever outlawed. Once it caught on, they realized that nobody would do the classic technique in a race, ever again, if they didn't separate out the 2 techniques. For a few years, while I was in college, you had to skate or you'd always place poorly - but either technique was allowed. Anyway, it became clear that what is now known as the classic technique would just die out if they didn't do something to save it.

I'm not sure it's as simple as just separating cycling into "with" and "without" categories. In a perfect world, where everyone is honest, but that's the opposite of what what we're dealing with here. The guys who cheat now will cheat, for the same reasons they cheat now. Why would someone that intent on winning at all costs want to race with a bunch of dopers, given a choice? I'd be willing to bet that at least a few people who would be willing to dope would also be willing to enter the "clean" category - and have an unfair advantage. It could possibly turn into a doper's dream scenario.

Money, money, money. And rock-star fame. But mostly money. The guys who are doping (and I'm still stubbornly and naively clinging to the dream that it isn't everyone) are doping for the money, and are willing to risk everything to do it. Why would that change? I think the consequences aren't strict enough to be a deterrent.

Boo Floyd! Boo Floyd for doping. Boo Floyd for lying. Boo Floyd for stealing. And boo Floyd for trying to sabotage everyone else as he's going down. I really have to think there is some mental illness there - it's just too weird. My DH thinks he's getting paid.

[OakLeaf]

Paint me cynical.

But the bottom line is that regardless of who was or was not technically breaking the rules, "doping" and biotech generally is regulated, not banned. I'm sure there's no one active in professional sport who's never had sport-related surgery; tweaked their body position in a wind tunnel; used caffeine, ibuprofen, lab-tested amino acid combinations or other substances that are legal in sport; etc., etc., etc. I mean, if all drugs were banned to all competitors, Lance would probably be dead, right (or more realistically, have never competed after his diagnosis)?

Sport is about rules. Rules by definition have a point at which they are completely arbitrary, and the sanctioning body just has to draw a line somewhere. The job of everyone on any team in any sport is to find a way around the rules. Sometimes people get carried away and go through instead of around. And then it's the sanctioning body's job to disqualify them, whether the violation is taking steroids or wearing a string around one's wrist.

[Skierchickie]

Cycle racing could become like cross-country ski racing (which has separate races for classic technique, and for the much faster skate technique--faster, but for a while, outlawed.)

Actually, the skating technique just came along relatively recently - I don't think it was ever outlawed. Once it caught on, they realized that nobody would do the classic technique in a race, ever again, if they didn't separate out the 2 techniques. For a few years, while I was in college, you had to skate or you'd always place poorly - but either technique was allowed. Anyway, it became clear that what is now known as the classic technique would just die out if they didn't do something to save it.

I'm not sure it's as simple as just separating cycling into "with" and "without" categories. In a perfect world, where everyone is honest, but that's the opposite of what what we're dealing with here. The guys who cheat now will cheat, for the same reasons they cheat now. Why would someone that intent on winning at all costs want to race with a bunch of dopers, given a choice? I'd be willing to bet that at least a few people who would be willing to dope would also be willing to enter the "clean" category - and have an unfair advantage. It could possibly turn into a doper's dream scenario.

Money, money, money. And rock-star fame. But mostly money. The guys who are doping (and I'm still stubbornly and naively clinging to the dream that it isn't everyone) are doping for the money, and are willing to risk everything to do it. Why would that change? I think the consequences aren't strict enough to be a deterrent.

Boo Floyd! Boo Floyd for doping. Boo Floyd for lying. Boo Floyd for stealing. And boo Floyd for trying to sabotage everyone else as he's going down. I really have to think there is some mental illness there - it's just too weird. My DH thinks he's getting paid.

[jobob]

Here's an interesting article
http://www.cycle-smart.com/blog/2010...etty-boy-floyd

At the same time, at no point did I think Landis was innocent, or that he hadn't been doping. But every time I'd see him talk about it, I felt like he was always winking while he did it. My understanding of Floyd's position went something like this: "Oh **** yes I doped. I doped just like everyone else did. I did not invent doping, and I understood that at the level I was at, it was part of my job description, like Lance, like George. So why should I be the only one who goes down for it?" I saw Landis fighting the charges not because he hadn't doped, because like all his peers, he had. I saw him fighting it because he thought the system was ****ed up, and I mean the whole system. The team he was on that encouraged him to dope, the labs that didn't follow their own rules, the UCI that had its own interests to protect. Why would any of us expect Floyd to "do the right thing" here, and in his mind, take the fall or be the scapegoat for a system he participated in by choice, but that he sure didn't invent?

[Skierchickie]

Cycle racing could become like cross-country ski racing (which has separate races for classic technique, and for the much faster skate technique--faster, but for a while, outlawed.)

Actually, the skating technique just came along relatively recently - I don't think it was ever outlawed. Once it caught on, they realized that nobody would do the classic technique in a race, ever again, if they didn't separate out the 2 techniques. For a few years, while I was in college, you had to skate or you'd always place poorly - but either technique was allowed. Anyway, it became clear that what is now known as the classic technique would just die out if they didn't do something to save it.

I'm not sure it's as simple as just separating cycling into "with" and "without" categories. In a perfect world, where everyone is honest, but that's the opposite of what what we're dealing with here. The guys who cheat now will cheat, for the same reasons they cheat now. Why would someone that intent on winning at all costs want to race with a bunch of dopers, given a choice? I'd be willing to bet that at least a few people who would be willing to dope would also be willing to enter the "clean" category - and have an unfair advantage. It could possibly turn into a doper's dream scenario.

Money, money, money. And rock-star fame. But mostly money. The guys who are doping (and I'm still stubbornly and naively clinging to the dream that it isn't everyone) are doping for the money, and are willing to risk everything to do it. Why would that change? I think the consequences aren't strict enough to be a deterrent.

Boo Floyd! Boo Floyd for doping. Boo Floyd for lying. Boo Floyd for stealing. And boo Floyd for trying to sabotage everyone else as he's going down. I really have to think there is some mental illness there - it's just too weird. My DH thinks he's getting paid.

[tiva]

Actually, the skating technique just came along relatively recently - I don't think it was ever outlawed. Once it caught on, they realized that nobody would do the classic techniqu

You're right: after the 1985 world championships in Seefeld, there was a lot of talk about banning it, with the Norwegians in particular pushing for a ban. But then the FIS agreed to separate out the races instead. http://northernlightsonline.blogspot...evolution.html

[AMP]

But Armstrong did test positive for EPO, he just couldn't be sanctioned because the samples were "B" samples. His people said he was exonerted; I'd hardly call it that. Like, Yeah, OJ was acquitted. There are many, many people who are speaking out about doping and, yes, going after Armstrong. I cannot begin to imagine the frustration of people who know the truth and have to listen to the DAMAGE CONTROL spin.
Also, Landis's emails went to the UCI and were leaked by someone there to the Wall Street Journal. Landis did not go to the press. Insofar as Landis's lying is concerned, is it any different from Armstrong's? Bold denials, payoffs, books written, appeals to the public....
My brother refers to Lance as Pharmstrong.

"Now finally the cycling community will realize that doping should be required of all riders in the tour. Testing should be used to merely confirm riders have the minimum levels of dope in their systems. That way it will be fair."

For a less cynical viewpoint try www.bikepure.org

[PinkBike]

i'm so upset over this.

i believed floyd. he came to tucson and asked for money for his defense fund. a lot of his defense attorneys' fees were donated. i bought and loaned his book to friends. it had compelling arguments. i had a letter published in "cycle sport" in his defense, for cripes sake.

i believed tyler. the first time. i don't believe ANYBODY anymore.

i'm just sickened by it all. how can a person look you in the eyes and lie to you?

i agree with the psychological issues diagnosis. when you read his comments and retrace all his actions he seems really out there. i think he is at the very least bitter. mad at lance because lance was mean to him after he left postal for phonak. mad at the sport for not allowing his team to race the tour of california.

as for the mention of lemond and andreau, lemond is REALLY bitter, and it wasnt frankie it was his wife.

i'm done with all this.

[ridebikeme]

With everything i've read, it was indeed Frankie AND his wife, that's something that just came to light not too long ago because Frankie and Lance had had their first conversaion since all of this. Regardless of who talked with whom, there's a scenerio that keeps popping up. That scenerio is jealousy/bitterness , whatever you want to call it... and I'm beginning to believe that there is a reason for it. I'm not sure what will come of this situation, but there will come a time where we WILL know the truth. AS others have mentioned, the TDF is simply too long and rode at such incredible speed that the human body isn't designed for that... at least not without help.

At any rate, the next few weeks will be interesting.