Saturday, August 05, 2006

Landis' Sample B Positive; Maillot Jaune "Sullied"

The news is out everywhere. Floyd Landis has tested positive on the follow-up test. He has already been removed by Team Phonak and Tour de France officials are working on transfering the title to Oscar Pereiro, who finished behind Landis.


Blogger Erling said...

Free Landis???

Please no: Free the sport for his types. Face it: Hamilton, Landis, Ulrich (by the way I feel pretty sure about Lance too) - those fellows are common cheaters. Dpoing is cheating, and with these figures (11:1 where it's usually 1:1) there are no excuses.

Sometimes you might wonder if bikers just are doing dope - or smoking wheede too. It's incredible which excuses they perform: Hamilton had an unborn brother producing his own hormone - Floyd had been drinking beer and whiskey (and when everybody else get's hangovers, he goes out to perform the race of his life).

OK - in the category of bad excuses they are still only #2. Daniel Plaza still leads :-)

4:23 PM  
Blogger PJ said...

I feel truely sorry that the Floyd Landis TDF Stage 17 test results are coming back with an "adverse analytical finding" on both the A and B samples. Given the published statements coming from him and his lawyers, they certainly don't have a credible explanation.

So far, Landis and his legal team have come up completely lame with their theories/defenses/statements:
-naturally high testosterone levels
-drinking the evening before the stage
-thyroid hormone medication
-hip pain medication
-invalidity of the T/E test
-invalidity of the IRMS test
-no artificial testosterone present in samples
-UCI mishandiing the dissemination of the information to the public

Pehaps they should spend more time thinking before they speak. The stupidity of their statements is swinging me toward the "Ladis must be guilty" camp. I really wanna believe that he's an upright, honest and hard working racer. The facts, however, are making it really difficult.

Now, my comments on remarks coming from others on; Why would he take testosterone? He never tested positive before? He couldn't be that dumb to dope during the Tour de France.

1). Motive for taking testosterone. It is a proven muscle recovery booster. It is obvious that Landis needed to recover from the blow-up of stage 16. Also, recovery is KEY to performing well during the last week of a 3 week long stage race. There was a HUGE motive to use testosterone after stage 16/before stage 17.

2). Landis never tested positive during any other race this year or otherwise. (Tour de California, Tour de Georgia, Paris Nice, Dauphine) I'm certainly not an expert, but it seems as though the pros are pretty good about beating drug tests (expecially the T/E testosterone test). I would say that either he has been "beating" the tests or maybe even won some of those races clean. Don't forget, they were all shorter races with less emphasis on recovery (granted they were tough!). He also may have "beaten" the tests during earlier stages of the tour.

3). What pro is stupid enough to dope only during stage 17 of the TDF? Perhaps this was the only time he got caught. It is possible that in his distress and drinking after stage 16, he forgot to use the testosterone masking agents? Perhaps he did not use the correct dosage? Perhaps overdosaged himself with synthetic testosterone? Made some sort of mental error.

The bottom line is that the motive, analytical tests and performance results all support testosterone doping by Floyd Landis during the TDF. He and his legal team have not indicated anything promising that would refute that.

My only hope is that after they receive the actual documentation, they can prove conclusively that it is false. It they can't, I agree with Greg Lemond. Floyd should come clean, name names and apologize!!!

4:32 PM  
Blogger Patrick said...

I do not believe that multiple defenses equals self-incrimination. Have you ever been falsely accused of something? How many things are running through your mind? Sometimes those things running through your mind sound like, "well maybe it could seem like I'm guilty if I did X, but I didn't" and so on. He just opened his mouth WRT scenarios. It sort of reminds me of Kafka's _The Trial_ where the protagonist who stands accused of some vague crime tries to figure out exactly *what* crime, and often finds himself convincing himself he's guilty, not guilty, guilty, etc.

2:21 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home