PDA

View Full Version : Floyd Landis in the Tour Today



Aggie Hoopsfan
07-20-2006, 10:45 PM
That was an absolutely sick ride. I hope he can finish it off and win the damn thing.

That has to be one of the gutsiest single stage rides of all time. :tu

And here's to an American sticking it to the French, again!

velik_m
07-21-2006, 02:13 AM
General Classification after Stage 17:

1 Oscar Pereiro (Spa) Caisse d'Epargne-Illes Balears 80hrs 08mins 49secs

2 Carlos Sastre (Spa) Team CSC at 0.12secs

3 Floyd Landis (USA) Phonak at 0:30

4 Andreas Kloden (Ger) T-Mobile at 2:29

5 Cadel Evans (Aus) Davitamon-Lotto at 3:08

6 Denis Menchov (Rus) Rabobank at 4:14

7 Cyril Dessel (Fra) AG2R-Prevoyance at 4:24

8 Christophe Moreau (Fra) AG2R-Prevoyance at 5:45

9 Haimar Zubeldia (Spa) Euskaltel-Euskadi at 8:16

10 Michael Rogers (Aus) T-Mobile at 12:13

11 Frank Schleck (Lux) Team CSC at 13:48

12 Michael Boogerd (Ned) Rabobank at 13:52

13 Pietro Caucchioli (Ita) Credit Agricole at 15:46

14 Damiano Cunego (Ita) Lampre-Fondital at 17:18

15 Marcus Fothen (Ger) Gerolsteiner at 17:23

16 Tadej Valjavec (Slo) Lampre-Fondital at 20:50

17 Michael Rasmussen (Den) Rabobank at 21:04

18 Levi Leipheimer (USA) Gerolsteiner at 22:01

19 Jose Azevedo (Por) Discovery Channel at 34:01

20 David Arroyo (Spa) Caisse d'Epargne-Illes Balears at 37:11

pache100
07-21-2006, 09:56 AM
That was an absolutely sick ride. I hope he can finish it off and win the damn thing.

That has to be one of the gutsiest single stage rides of all time. :tu

And here's to an American sticking it to the French, again!

:tu

degenerate_gambler
07-21-2006, 10:24 AM
I'll admit not really giving a shit about the Tour this year with no Armstrong.

I still don't. But watching this guy last nite was incredible. He ate that mountain up and spit it back out at the rest of them.

Props to Landis....bring it home.

Budkin
07-22-2006, 02:46 PM
Landis is back in Yellow today! Hell yeah, he's gonna take it home for the US again barring a major disaster in Paris. Amazing! :elephant :elephant

Aggie Hoopsfan
07-23-2006, 11:14 AM
http://espn-att.starwave.com/photo/2006/0723/oly_a_landis_412.jpg

T Park
07-23-2006, 12:58 PM
Way to go floyd.

Way to give a huge fuck you to the French also.


USA
USA
USA!!!

:lol Gotta love it.

alamo50
07-23-2006, 01:06 PM
The French kicked the best Italian and German out and still an American won again!

:lol

ATX Spur
07-23-2006, 03:24 PM
Congrats to Landis! way to go!

timvp
07-23-2006, 04:02 PM
So I guess Lance Armstrong wasn't the super hero he was made out to be. He quits and then some other scrub takes over and wins.

Apology Accepted.

ChumpDumper
07-23-2006, 04:43 PM
I doubt the French are pissed with Landis' winning. They like it when guys win the way he did.

I don't ever see his winning again though. I put it right up there with Stephen Roche's win back in '87 in terms of pure guts.

Aggie Hoopsfan
07-23-2006, 04:56 PM
So I guess Lance Armstrong wasn't the super hero he was made out to be. He quits and then some other scrub takes over and wins.

Apology Accepted.


1. Landis isn't a scrub.

2. It took one of the all-time greatest individual single stage rides in the history of the Tour to put Landis on the podium.

Horry For 3!
07-23-2006, 10:06 PM
USA > all

judaspriestess
07-24-2006, 01:11 AM
CONGRATULATIONS FLOYD LANDIS :elephant :spin

T Park
07-24-2006, 02:06 AM
So I guess Lance Armstrong wasn't the super hero he was made out to be. He quits and then some other scrub takes over and wins.

Apology Accepted

Your hate on Lance Armstrong is borderline childish.

ChumpDumper
07-24-2006, 04:06 AM
LJ will never forgive him for dumping Sheryl....

johngateswhiteley
07-24-2006, 06:33 AM
...amazing. i watched about half the stages and am really proud of Landis, what a great ride. Congrats!

...btw, those who think this takes away from Lance's accomplishments are not only wrong...they know nothing about cycling.

pache100
07-24-2006, 09:46 AM
Landis is back in Yellow today! Hell yeah, he's gonna take it home for the US again barring a major disaster in Paris. Amazing! :elephant :elephant

How are teh French going to explain this now? They whined and bitched for all those years about Lance taking drugs...and now they have been beaten at their own game by a guy who needs a hip replacement!

degenerate_gambler
07-24-2006, 10:08 AM
...and now they have been beaten at their own game by a guy who needs a hip replacement!


Crazy huh?

Budkin
07-24-2006, 01:04 PM
So I guess Lance Armstrong wasn't the super hero he was made out to be. He quits and then some other scrub takes over and wins.

Apology Accepted.

Lance came back from death's doorstep and won 7 tours in a row. That's SEVEN of the most grueling athletic event on the planet. In a row. I think that qualifies him as a super hero.

GrandeDavid
07-24-2006, 09:21 PM
What a huge win! Go Floyd, if not for your name, alone! The only Floyd, besides Cliff or Curl, is Brad Pitt's character in True Romance.

GrandeDavid
07-24-2006, 09:21 PM
Oh, there's also Floyd the Barber, thanks to Nirvana.

E20
07-25-2006, 04:46 PM
Why do people hate the French so much....................LMAO

ChumpDumper
07-25-2006, 06:37 PM
Uh, the French like Floyd. Who was the last Frenchman to win anyway?

Hinault?

whottt
07-25-2006, 06:51 PM
Why do people hate the French so much....................LMAO



Read some news articles sometime...then crack a history book some other time.

Plenty of reasons...

For every good gesture they have done there are 4 or 5 backstabbings...

Or to put it another way, it's not so much that we hate them, it's that they hate us.

Bruno
07-25-2006, 07:53 PM
What a bunch of clueless post.

If you think that french people hate Landis and american people, you are clueless about french people.

If you think that Le tour organisation has kicked Basso and co to allow that a french guy win Le tour, you are clueless about cycling.

E20
07-25-2006, 08:47 PM
Read some news articles sometime...then crack a history book some other time.

Plenty of reasons...

For every good gesture they have done there are 4 or 5 backstabbings...

Or to put it another way, it's not so much that we hate them, it's that they hate us.
I'm pretty aware of US and French historical relations, I took AP US History, but I see Aggie and T_Park over there trying to get the best of the French with such passion and I wonder why. lmao

whottt
07-25-2006, 08:56 PM
Bruno is an example of a good but misguided French...

I can tell he's basically a good dude and I sincerely don't mean to lump him in with all the French, nor do I intend to bash him personally, but he too, needs to crack a history book sometime....and if the thinks things are à tout casser at the national level, then he is on crack.

And I don't think the French hate Landis.

They didn't hate Armstrong after he won his first tour either. He too was a celebration of life(and yes I know not all French people hated Armstrong even at the end of his career and personally I wouldn't blame them if they did...).

Bruno
07-25-2006, 09:15 PM
Bruno is an example of a good but misguided French...

I can tell he's basically a good dude and I sincerely don't mean to lump him in with all the French, nor do I intend to bash him personally, but he too, needs to crack a history book sometime....and if the thinks things are à tout casser at the national level, then he is on crack.


Me, misguided :lol

Let me sum up :
I'm French and I live in France since I was born and you claim that you know better than me what french people think ? Laughable.

You obviously don't know well french people and you need too to read some history books.

BTW, I'd like to say that you are a good dude too but after I've read you insulting a whole people I simply can't do that.

Samr
07-25-2006, 09:37 PM
Your hate on Lance Armstrong is borderline childish.

Don't worry, TPark. I'm sure it's hard for him to try to sound right all the time.

It was a sad day in all of sports when Lance retired. He was a class athlete who won with respect, honor, and unbridled passion for the sport or cycling. He put up with the French Inquisition which used "evidence" that was completely unfounded and, despite testing him more than any other athlete in professional sports, unproven. He wasn't a scrub, as Timvp seems think, but instead a Michael Jordan. He dominated the sport in a way no one ever has. And he was more tollerant of adversity than anyone will ever be.

I'm sure timvp would be singing a different tune if David Robinson was in his place. Who's the scrub now?

Aggie Hoopsfan
07-25-2006, 09:39 PM
I'm pretty aware of US and French historical relations, I took AP US History, but I see Aggie and T_Park over there trying to get the best of the French with such passion and I wonder why. lmao

:lol I just do it for the hell of it. One of my roommates in college was French, and even he thought the majority of his countrymen were pussies.

Samr
07-25-2006, 09:40 PM
And as far as the French go, shit, right now they have Mahinmi, and Parker is French too. Everything else is small potatos.

ChumpDumper
07-25-2006, 10:05 PM
He dominated the sport in a way no one ever has.Well, he dominated the Tour, but he only got first in one one-day classic, for example. His focus on the Tour to the exclusion of everything else keeps me from ranking him ahead of Eddy Merckx.

Beer is Good
07-25-2006, 11:18 PM
:lol I just do it for the hell of it. One of my roommates in college was French, and even he thought the majority of his countrymen were pussies.
I agree with you there. They whine and cry on a national level about foreign policies. They say they want to be tough on international criminals but lack the balls to do anything about the problems. If they don't want to take part in anything and be another Switzerland, fine. But don't talk big then back down and let others do the dirty work while you scoff them. And that has become the way of the French Government. The people, I don't know. The Government, I do.

Beer is Good
07-25-2006, 11:20 PM
Me, misguided :lol

Let me sum up :
I'm French and I live in France since I was born and you claim that you know better than me what french people think ? Laughable.

You obviously don't know well french people and you need too to read some history books.

BTW, I'd like to say that you are a good dude too but after I've read you insulting a whole people I simply can't do that.
I don't think he meant the French people as much as the French Government. I am an American - I love the people but really hate a lot of the things the American Government does. There is a difference.

timvp
07-26-2006, 06:04 AM
Don't worry, TPark. I'm sure it's hard for him to try to sound right all the time.

It's actually easy being right all the time.


It was a sad day in all of sports when Lance retired. He was a class athlete who won with respect, honor, and unbridled passion for the sport or cycling.

:jack

That's why a lot of people in the sport don't like him, including his own teammates?

And there's no respect and honor in riding a bike.


He put up with the French Inquisition which used "evidence" that was completely unfounded and, despite testing him more than any other athlete in professional sports, unproven.

Him being or not being on steroids is not part of my point.


He wasn't a scrub, as Timvp seems think, but instead a Michael Jordan.

Well you obviously can't read. I said this Landis character is a scrub. Lance Armstrong isn't really a scrub, he's just the most overrated athlete of this generation.


He dominated the sport in a way no one ever has. And he was more tollerant of adversity than anyone will ever be.

A) There is more to the "sport" than the single race. Talk to people who ride bikes and they think Lance is a farce because all he did was concentrate on the Tour de France.

B) Tollerant? The guy is always crying about how the French are out to get him. Turn on the TV or radio once in a while.


I'm sure timvp would be singing a different tune if David Robinson was in his place.

If David Robinson rode bikes for a living I wouldn't even know who he was. It's a shame that Lance is hyped up to the degree he is.


Who's the scrub now?

Either the guy who can't read or Landis. Take your pick.

As far as Landis, how are you going to tell me bike riding is a real sport when the winner is suffering from Bo Jackson disease. His hip is done. You're telling me there's no other bike rider in the world with complete hips who isn't better?

Or perhaps, just perhaps, it's the American team which is dominant and didn't have much to do with Lance Armstrong. They put some cripple on a bike and they tell him to win and the team comes thru.

It's barely a sport to begin with and Landis winning it this year should hopefully take some of the luster off of those who try to claim that Lance is the best athlete of All-Time or whatever.

kris
07-26-2006, 06:30 AM
Biking is great exercise, but obviously not much of a sport.

ChumpDumper
07-26-2006, 02:34 PM
Or perhaps, just perhaps, it's the American team which is dominant and didn't have much to do with Lance Armstrong. They put some cripple on a bike and they tell him to win and the team comes thru.Landis rides for a Swiss team, not Lance's team.

ChumpDumper
07-26-2006, 02:48 PM
In the modern day, the Tour has been dominated by whoever has the most favorable genetic freakishness. Miguel Indurain had the aerobic capacity of a blue whale and Lance had an abnormal tolerance to lactic acid. While these guys were still in their primes nobody was going to beat them barring a crash or unbelieveable tactical error -- maybe Jan Ullrich could've taken another one from Lance if he stayed off the sauce, but he's a German Indurain.

For the average pro bike rider, racing in general and riding the Tour in particular is an exercise in masochism -- so Floyd just took it to another level. Good for him. Closely contested Tours are much more exciting than the predictable snoozefests that happen too often.

timvp
07-26-2006, 07:01 PM
Landis rides for a Swiss team, not Lance's team.

Still a scrub.

:smokin

ChumpDumper
07-26-2006, 07:20 PM
He did fine the only other year he was a team leader. The only difference I can see in the Bo Jackson condition is the fact that cycling has much less of an impact on the joints than sports that involve running and jumping. It makes sense that if someone has a high tolerance to pain, he can cycle with that condition at a high level -- and Tour riders have that in spades.

whottt
07-27-2006, 02:40 AM
Me, misguided :lol

Let me sum up :
I'm French and I live in France since I was born and you claim that you know better than me what french people think ? Laughable.


Not only do I think I know what the French people think...

But evidentally I can read French better than you...

Remember your link to the "hair" sample drug test?



You obviously don't know well french people and you need too to read some history books.

No seriously...you need to, if you can't figure out why some of us well read Americans are offended...you are in serious denial.

And the current relations between our countries are only part of the reason.




BTW, I'd like to say that you are a good dude too but after I've read you insulting a whole people I simply can't do that.

I wasn't trying to fish for compliments from you...if that were my intention I don't think I'd go about it by slamming your country.

I said you were basically a good dude simply because I felt it's true...

It's not intended to obligate you into saying someting you feel is untrue.....

It also doesn't mean you have a clue what the fuck you are talking about, either with regards to Lance's alleged Drug Test Failures...or the history between our two countries.

whottt
07-27-2006, 02:43 AM
And as far as the French go, shit, right now they have Mahinmi, and Parker is French too. Everything else is small potatos.

It's logic like this that makes the world a fucked up place...

So since Dirk is German does that make Hitler small potatos as well?


Shit in that case....most of the great basketball players are American...therefore you need to go preach that small potatos message to the rest of the world...

ChumpDumper
07-27-2006, 03:06 AM
Personally, if Frankie Andreau and his wife say you told him you did illegal drugs, you did illegal drugs. Lance's case is closed in my eyes. He probably would have won two or three Tours without them, but that's modern cycling.

And as much as I hate to say it, tlongII would likely own anyone else on this message board in a century, no matter how much we'd say it isn't a sport.

whottt
07-27-2006, 03:12 AM
Here's a nice example of French Hospitality and Sportsmanship(one that also does a pretty good job of ending the Rugby VS Soccer VS NFL argument as well):

http://spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?p=1129908#post1129908

AN AMERICAN COUP IN PARIS

Remember the excitement of the 1924 Olympics in Chariots of Fire? That was nothing compared with what the U.S. rugby team did to the French at those games.

by Mark Jenkins



It is springtime in post-World War 1 Paris, the final day of the rugby tournament at the VIII Olympiad, to be exact, and fifty thousand Frenchmen are filing into Colombes Stadium to watch the mighty French national rugby team win the first gold medal of the 1924 Olympics. Their opponents? A ragtag band of California college kids calling themselves the USA Olympic rugby team. Barely two hours later the novice American rugby team has pulled off what the United Press sports editor Henry L. Farrell was to call “the brightest entry that has been scored on all the pages of American international sports records.” But U.S. supporters lie beaten unconscious on the sidelines, and the Yankee players have to be rescued from a rioting crowd by dozens of armed police. And rugby is never again played as an Olympic sport.

Few Americans are aware that rugby was played at the Olympics on four occasions between 1900 and 1924, let alone know what happened when the last gold medal was up for grabs. What is even more astonishing is that in 1924 the USA Olympic rugby team was the only American rugby team in existence.

Despite a brief flurry of interest in California at the turn of the century, rugby had become extinct in the United States by the outbreak of World War I, overwhelmed by the rapid growth of its professional offspring, American football. The sport had not been played competitively in the United States for more than a decade when, in September 1923, the U.S. Olympic Committee (USOC) received an urgent request from its French counterpart for an American team to take part in the rugby event at the 1924 Olympics. England, Scotland, Ireland, and Wales had refused to enter because of the French fans’ reputation for-violence; New Zealand, Australia, and South Africa could not afford to travel to Europe. So far only Rumania had challenged France for the gold medal, and its team was not expected to put up even the semblance of a contest.

Although French Olympic officials were anxious to sign up another national team for the event, they were not looking for a serious challenger. The French Olympic Committee (FOC) had scheduled the rugby tournament to kick off the 1924 Games, and they were determined that France should bag the prestigious first gold medal.

The United States was the FOC’s ideal candidate. Officially the United States was the defending Olympic rugby champion, after upsetting France for the gold at the 1920 Antwerp Olympics. But European rugby pundits had dismissed that victory as a fluke, and anyway, as the French knew, the American national rugby team had been disbanded after the 1920 Games, almost all the players had given up rugby, and the sport had died out in the United States.

Most of the team had never played rugby, but they were probably the world’s finest group of athletes.
“They were looking for a punching bag,” comments eighty-seven-year-old Norman Cleaveland, a Stanford all-American halfback of the 1920s and one of the first athletes to respond to the recruiting call put out through the press. “We were told to go to Paris and take our beatings like gentlemen.”

The team arrived in Paris on April 27, 1924, a full month before the remainder of the American Olympic contingent, after a six-thousand-mile journey from Oakland, California. In the previous six months a squad of twenty-two superb athletes—primarily Stanford students, including four veterans of the 1920 team—had been recruited and trained in San Francisco. Most of the players had never before played rugby; Charlie Austin, the U.S. coach, was relying on his team’s size, speed, stamina, and raw athletic ability to compensate for its deficient technique. Still, their vigorous shipboard work-outs aboard the SS America as it steamed toward Europe were always followed by chalkboard sessions on rugby rules and tactics.

The team picked up its last member, Alan Valentine, in England. Valentine was an ail-American football player and Rhodes scholar who, since arriving to study in England, had adapted his football talents and become one of the finest rugby forwards of the era. But he was by no means a standout on the team. The men of the 1924 USA Olympic rugby team were probably the finest assembly of all-around athletes in the world.

“We could have fielded a first-class team of any kind,” says Cleaveland, who had himself been courted by the pros after graduating from Stanford. In addition to Valentine and Cleaveland, there was Dudley DeGroot, another Stanford all-American, who also lettered in basketball and was a college swimming champion; William (“Lefty”) Rogers, Stanford’s basketball captain; Caesar Manelli, a star of Santa Clara University’s baseball, basketball, and football programs; and the famously immodest Richard (“Tricky Dick”) Hyland, a Stanford football halfback. When an American sportswriter compared Hyland to the great athlete Jim Thorpe, his response was, “Hell, Thorpe never had my swerve!”

If these athletes expected to be welcomed by their French hosts with kisses on both cheeks, they were unpleasantly surprised. The members of the U.S. Olympic rugby team were the target of Gallic hostility from the moment they stepped onto French soil. French journalists branded them “saloon brawlers and streetfighters” after a brouhaha in the port of Boulogne, where immigration officials mistakenly refused the team entry and the American players—many of whom had been seasick during the unusually turbulent crossing from England— forced their way off the ferry onto dry land.

From that inauspicious start the Americans’ reputation only deteriorated, though as the surviving members of the team are quick to point out, any unseemly antics were either press exaggerations or simply a response to the team’s frightful treatment by its hosts. “If they wanted to push us around,” says Charlie Doe, a ninety-year-old veteran of both the 1920 and 1924 teams still living in California, “then we damn well pushed back.”

True to form, when Paris authorities canceled previously arranged warm-up games between the U.S. rugby team and local clubs and restricted American work-outs to a patch of scrubland, the players responded by marching down to Colombes Stadium, scaling the fence, and going through their paces on the hallowed turf. “It wasn’t the best way to conduct international affairs,” concedes Norman Cleaveland.

By game time the French press had whipped up fierce anti-American sentiment on the streets of Paris. U.S. players were insulted and spat upon whenever they dared venture outside their hotel. Even members of Paris’s American expatriate colony were steering clear of the ruffian ruggers.

On May 11, a week after France defeated Rumania, 61-3, for a berth in the final, the United States trounced the hapless Rumanians, 37-0, with six of the American team’s best players warming the bench. The French crowd cheered whenever the Rumanians got their hands on the ball and booed every American score. But the American victory guaranteed what every French rugby fan craved: the chance for France to redeem its defeat in Antwerp four years earlier by walloping the neophyte American team.

The finale of the 1924 Paris Olympic rugby tournament was played at Colombes Stadium on the suffocating spring afternoon of Sunday, May 18, before a capacity crowd of fifty thousand Frenchmen oblivious of the FOC’s public appeal for calm. Paris bookies had set the odds at twenty to one; the point spread was twenty. And no wonder: The French national team not only was European champion but included the legendary Adolphe Jauréguy, the fastest rugby player alive.

The mob packing the stands expected an easy gold medal. But from the kickoff it was obvious the young American players intended to avenge their treatment at the hands of the French. “They didn’t know it, but they had prepared us mentally to play the game of our lives,” says the team’s vice-captain, Charlie Doe.

Two minutes after the opening whistle, Adolphe Jauréguy received a pass on the wing. The crowd roared as its hero set off for the American goal line. But from out of nowhere came Lefty Rogers, who leveled the Frenchman with a tooth-rattling tackle. On the next play Jauréguy’s stride was broken by another lunging tackle by Rogers. Then it was the turn of Alan Valentine, who sprinted the width of the field to hurl his 210-pound bulk into Jauréguy.

“And that was the end of our French friend,” says Charlie Doe. Oblivious of the howling crowd, Jauréguy was carted off the field by medics—“like a sack of potatoes,” according to Doe.

At halftime the score was 3-0, the Americans leading, and as the team’s manager, Sam Goodman, put it, they had the French team “buffaloed.” The French players were devastated by the ferocity of the Americans’ football-style tackles, though, as they admitted after the game, all the hits were within the rules.

The second half was the United States all the way. Battered into submission, the French defense crumbled in the face of wave upon wave of American attacking moves. “Our men,” wrote André Glarner of the Excelsior sports newspaper, “too frail and hesitant, too fragile, could not hold up before the admirable athletes that were before them.” With a humiliating defeat imminent, the crowd turned nasty. American supporters were beaten up in the stands, and their bodies were passed down to the field and picked up by ambulances. “I saw those poor fellows lying there and just assumed they were dead,” says Cleaveland. “We were sure it was only a matter of time before they got their hands on us.”

The mob expected easy gold, but the Americans meant to avenge the treatment they had received.
Toward the end of the game the United States was scoring almost at will. Tricky Dick Hyland confounded the French players with what a Paris journalist described as “disconcerting foot changes.” Only the referee’s unorthodox interpretations of rules prevented the American team from running up a score of thirty or forty points. Terrified of the potentially catastrophic consequences of a complete wipeout by the Americans, the referee called back at least four touchdowns by Hyland and Cleaveland for dubious infractions.

When the final whistle blew, the score stood at 17-3, and the French crowd was hysterical. “We had no idea what was going to happen to us,” says Cleaveland. “They were throwing bottles and rocks over the fence and clawing at us through the railing.”

Charlie Doe saw the band pick up its instruments and the conductor wave his baton, but he couldn’t hear a single note through the cacophony of booing and catcalls. “Then we saw the Stars and Stripes being raised and realized they were playing “The Star-Spangled Banner,’” he says. “We had completely forgotten about the medal ceremony, which took place in front of tens of thousands of people who wanted to tear us to pieces.”

The attitude of the French press changed dramatically after the rout. French journalists agreed, in the interest of the remainder of the Games, to portray the American ruggers as heroes. “The American fifteen is comprised of true athletes, all fast, strong, energetic, and possessing athletic qualities of which we are rarely aware in France,” wrote Glarner. The fickle French public responded in kind. “When you’re a hero in Paris, that’s something!” says Cleveland. “All we had to do was walk into a bar or restaurant and there would be clapping and free drinks all around.”

After several weeks of what Cleaveland remembers as “unmitigated pleasure” in Paris, the American team returned to the United States, where most of the players gave up rugby and went on to successful careers: Alan Valentine became a full professor of arts and letters at Yale and later the president of the University of Rochester; Lefty Rogers, who died during the writing of this article, pioneered in the field of chest surgery; Charlie Doe became one of the nation’s leading geologists; Dick Hyland went on to be a controversial sportswriter for the Los Angeles Times; and Linn Parish, who scored two touchdowns against France at Colombes, was a decorated World War II hero renowned for his rescues of downed American fliers behind German lines. He died shortly before the war’s end. “Not only were my teammates great athletes,” says Cleaveland, who divides his time between homes in New Mexico, California, and England after a successful career as a mining engineer, “but they were an exceptional group of men.”

Shortly after the 1924 Olympics the International Olympic Committee canceled rugby as an Olympic sport, even though it had sold far more tickets than the track-and-field events of that year celebrated in the motion picture Chariots of Fire. The reasons for the ban: the French crowds’ appalling behavior and the lack of widespread international participation. Despite the spectacular American victory, rugby in the United States immediately went back into hibernation. As Charlie Doe points out, the Olympics were “not such a big deal” before the advent of television coverage, which today can propel an obscure sport like Olympic hockey into the public imagination. “If we had had that kind of coverage back then,” says Doe, “rugby might be the great American pastime today.”

Instead, rugby in the United States languishes in obscurity, struggling for recognition despite a revival in the sport since the early 1960s. America today has no international triumphs to boast about, but when American ruggers gather to discuss their woes, someone will inevitably bring up the events of the VIII Olympiad. “Remember 1924,” the person will say, toasting the sultry afternoon sixty-five years ago when fifteen young Americans flipped the international rugby establishment on its head. “Remember 1924.”

Mark Jenkins is executive director of the U.S. Rugby Football Foundation and writes frequently about rugby.





Edit: Obviously...there weren't any "Chumps" on that team...

whottt
07-27-2006, 03:13 AM
Personally, if Frankie Andreau and his wife say you told him you did illegal drugs, you did illegal drugs. Lance's case is closed in my eyes. He probably would have won two or three Tours without them, but that's modern cycling.

And as much as I hate to say it, tlongII would likely own anyone else on this message board in a century, no matter how much we'd say it isn't a sport.



Pull your head out and go watch your vintage Eddy Merckx films...connosieur.

Slomo
07-27-2006, 06:06 AM
Pull your head out and go watch your vintage Eddy Merckx films...connosieur.*cough*connoisseur*cough*

CubanMustGo
07-27-2006, 09:39 AM
Oopsie. Yahoo and Phonak sez Floyd was the one who tested positive(testosterone).

http://sports.yahoo.com/sc/news;_ylt=AizOHD7iJdIVi1SIkqLjSEh.grcF?slug=ap-landis-doping&prov=ap&type=lgns

The Swiss-based Phonak team said it was notified by the UCI on Wednesday that Landis' sample showed "an unusual level of testosterone/epitestosterone" when he was tested after stage 17 of the race last Thursday.

Landis made a remarkable comeback in that Alpine stage, racing far ahead of the field for a solo win that moved him from 11th to third in the overall standings. He regained the leader's yellow jersey two days later.

"The team management and the rider were both totally surprised of this physiological result," the Phonak statement said.

Phonak said Landis would ask for an analysis of his backup "B" sample "to prove either that this result is coming from a natural process or that this is resulting from a mistake."

Landis has been suspended by his team pending the results. If the second sample confirms the initial finding, he will be fired from the team, Phonak said.

leemajors
07-27-2006, 09:57 AM
Oopsie. Yahoo and Phonak sez Floyd was the one who tested positive(testosterone).

http://sports.yahoo.com/sc/news;_ylt=AizOHD7iJdIVi1SIkqLjSEh.grcF?slug=ap-landis-doping&prov=ap&type=lgns

The Swiss-based Phonak team said it was notified by the UCI on Wednesday that Landis' sample showed "an unusual level of testosterone/epitestosterone" when he was tested after stage 17 of the race last Thursday.

Landis made a remarkable comeback in that Alpine stage, racing far ahead of the field for a solo win that moved him from 11th to third in the overall standings. He regained the leader's yellow jersey two days later.

"The team management and the rider were both totally surprised of this physiological result," the Phonak statement said.

Phonak said Landis would ask for an analysis of his backup "B" sample "to prove either that this result is coming from a natural process or that this is resulting from a mistake."

Landis has been suspended by his team pending the results. If the second sample confirms the initial finding, he will be fired from the team, Phonak said.

damn. they could take his victory away if the backup tests are the same right?

FromWayDowntown
07-27-2006, 10:26 AM
damn. they could take his victory away if the backup tests are the same right?

I would think they would have to.

Curious that the postive result came after Stage 17 and that remarkable climb that Landis made in the Alps the day after he bonked. I am no cycling aficionado, but I do watch the Tour. I hope the backup tests prove negative and that the controversy will die down quickly.

boutons_
07-27-2006, 10:50 AM
July 27, 2006

Landis Fails Drug Test After Triumph in Tour de France

By THE NEW YORK TIMES

Floyd Landis, who on Sunday became the third American cyclist to win the Tour de France, tested positive for a banned substance after winning Stage 17 of the race, his team announced today.

The Phonak team confirmed that Landis returned a positive “A” sample after Stage 17, in which he pulled off one of the most remarkable performances in cycling history. Landis struggled in Stage 16 the previous day, losing several minutes to his rivals. But in Stage 17, on July 20, he attacked over three grueling Alpine passes and won the final mountain stage of this year’s Tour by nearly six minutes, regaining much of the time he lost the previous day.

( doesn't sound good. bomb out one day, then go like a bomb the next day. )

“The Phonak Cycling Team was notified yesterday by the UCI about an unusual level of testosterone/epitestosterone ratio in the test made on Floyd Landis after stage 17 of the Tour de France,” the team said in a statement, referring to the international cycling union. “The team management and the rider were both totally surprised of this physiological result.”

A positive “A” sample does not prove that a rider used performance-enhancing substances; a second sample, the “B” sample, still must be tested to confirm the result.

“The rider will ask in the upcoming days for the counter analysis to prove either that this result is coming from a natural process or that this is resulting from a mistake in the confirmation,” Phonak said in the statement. “In application of the Pro Tour Ethical Code, the rider will not race anymore until this problem is totally clear.

“If the result of the ‘B’ sample analysis confirms the result of the ‘A’ sample, the rider will be dismissed and will then pass the corresponding endocrinological examinations.”

Tour de France drug-testing protocols require that the stage winner and the overall race leader are tested after every stage, plus at least two random selections.

Landis’s mother, Arlene, said this morning that she talked to him on Tuesday but that they did not discuss the drug test.

“I didn’t talk to him about that, but I know he’s taking medicine for the pain in his hip,” she said. “They stirred up trouble for Lance, too.”

Landis has a degenerative hip condition and planned to have hip-replacement surgery this fall. He finished the three-week, 2,267-mile race 57 seconds ahead of Oscar Pereiro of Spain, a former teammate of Landis who now rides for Caisse d’Épargne. Andreas Klöden of Germany, riding for T-Mobile, finished third, 1 minute 29 seconds behind Landis.

“I want to say thank you to everybody who kept believing, most of all my team,” Landis said after accepting the winner’s trophy, with the Arc de Triomphe behind him and the United States flag raised on a flagpole in front. “When things weren’t going so well, they kept fighting and never stopped believing.”

Landis, 31, kept the trophy in American hands after Lance Armstrong won it seven consecutive times before retiring after last year’s race.

The early part of this Tour was overshadowed by a doping scandal that left four of the top five finishers from last year’s race out of the event, among them Ivan Basso of Italy and Jan Ullrich of Germany, who had been among the favorites.

But Landis’s victory put the focus back on the race. His story of being reared in a Mennonite family in Pennsylvania, giving up mountain biking for road racing, then overcoming chronic pain to win cycling’s marquee race was expected to make him a worldwide sports celebrity.

Copyright 2006 The New York Times Company

ChumpDumper
07-27-2006, 10:55 AM
Pull your head out and go watch your vintage Eddy Merckx films...connosieur.You don't even know what you are arguing, do you?

Must think Andreau is French, right?

Dumbass.

whottt
07-27-2006, 11:19 AM
Oopsie. Yahoo and Phonak sez Floyd was the one who tested positive(testosterone).

http://sports.yahoo.com/sc/news;_ylt=AizOHD7iJdIVi1SIkqLjSEh.grcF?slug=ap-landis-doping&prov=ap&type=lgns

The Swiss-based Phonak team said it was notified by the UCI on Wednesday that Landis' sample showed "an unusual level of testosterone/epitestosterone" when he was tested after stage 17 of the race last Thursday.

Landis made a remarkable comeback in that Alpine stage, racing far ahead of the field for a solo win that moved him from 11th to third in the overall standings. He regained the leader's yellow jersey two days later.

"The team management and the rider were both totally surprised of this physiological result," the Phonak statement said.

Phonak said Landis would ask for an analysis of his backup "B" sample "to prove either that this result is coming from a natural process or that this is resulting from a mistake."

Landis has been suspended by his team pending the results. If the second sample confirms the initial finding, he will be fired from the team, Phonak said.





If Landis did this he is an idiot and an embarrasment.

If he did cheat...I wonder what his logic was, what makes guys think they can get away with stuff like this?

Or are they just willing to damage their reputation forever for the few moments of glory till they are caught?

whottt
07-27-2006, 11:21 AM
You don't even know what you are arguing, do you?

Mo like you don't even understand why you got slammed...




Must think Andreau is French, right?

Dumbass.


Classic Chump ass pulling....

What, when, who, how, where, why?

What ever makes you feel good Chump...

ChumpDumper
07-27-2006, 11:23 AM
There are many masking agents. Sometimes guys don't even know what they are getting in injections or pills; they just take what their trainers give them.

whottt
07-27-2006, 11:24 AM
I would also say that if Landis actually did cheat it helps Armstrong's Legacy....in the eyes of just about everyone...

Exluding those that judge guilt or innocence on words and no evidence of course.

ChumpDumper
07-27-2006, 11:24 AM
Mo like you don't even understand why you got slammed...


Classic Chump ass pulling....

What, when, who, how, where, why?

What ever makes you feel good Chump...You don't like the French and you want to have Lance's child.

Therefore I should be slammed.

whottt
07-27-2006, 11:26 AM
You don't like the French.

Therefore I should be slammed.


Something like that...

CubanMustGo
07-27-2006, 11:26 AM
If Landis did this he is an idiot and an embarrasment.

If he did cheat...I wonder what his logic was, what makes guys think they can get away with stuff like this?

Or are they just willing to damage their reputation forever for the few moments of glory till they are caught?

I agree and have no answers to your questions. Worth noting that the legal testosterone:epi ratio was lowered from 6:1 to 4:1 recently, too.

That said, according to an analyst on ESPNews, John Eustice, "every time an athlete has disputed a testosterone test, they have won, so the test itself is not as reliable as you might think." http://broadband.espn.go.com/ivp/splash?ceid=2531350 (Flash 8 required)

ChumpDumper
07-27-2006, 11:27 AM
So you didn't know what you were arguing after all.

Understood.

whottt
07-27-2006, 11:31 AM
Understood.


Like I said earlier...whatever makes you feel good.....Chump.

velik_m
07-27-2006, 11:51 AM
so his heroics were not so heroic?

Phonak had a doping troubles at last Vuelta, if i recall correctly.

I doubt normal people could ride as hard as this guys, they're probably all doped.

ChumpDumper
07-27-2006, 11:54 AM
Hootie is going to post an article about the Spanish now.

braeden0613
07-27-2006, 12:48 PM
Its nothing new...i bet at least a quarter or the participants were doing the same thing.

velik_m
07-27-2006, 01:01 PM
http://eurosport.com/cycling/tour-de-france/2006/sport_sto933039.shtml

Tour de France winner Floyd Landis has given a positive drugs test for the male sex hormone testosterone, his Phonak team said on Thursday. The failed test was returned following last Thursday's Alpine Stage 17 to Morzine, won by the American in breath-taking fashion after a 130-km solo run.

"The Phonak Cycling Team was notified yesterday by the UCI of an unusual level of testosterone / epitestosterone ratio in the test made on Floyd Landis after Stage 17 of the Tour de France," Phonak said in a team statement.

The team said that Landis would be removed from competitive races until the situation was clarified and stressed that, if the B sample analysis confirmed the A sample test, the rider would be sacked.

Landis, a 30-year-old Mennonite Christian, won the Tour de France on Sunday after an unconventional three-week race that was dubbed by many as the best in years.

The American had lost the yellow jersey in Stage 16 when he cracked in sensational style, losing ten minutes to his principal rivals on the ascent to La Toussuire.

But a day later, at Morzine, Landis performed the impossible in what was seen as one of the Tour's most staggering comebacks in history after he moved back into GC contention with his first ever career stage victory.

"Worst case scenario"

Speculation started to spread of Landis's involvement in the failed test after the Pennsylvanian failed to turn up to two scheduled criterium races in the Netherlands and in Denmark this week.

Following the UCI declaration on Wednesday night that one rider had tested positive, president Pat McQuaid said: "I will say that I am extremely angry and feel very let down by this. The credibility of the sport is at stake. The rider, his federation and his team have been informed of the situation."

The Irishman refused to divulge the identity of the rider in question but was quoted as saying: "It's the worst case scenario."

McQuaid was right: Landis's positive test is the final blow for a Tour hampered by drug allegations before it had even started.

Following the suspension of nine Tour riders in the Spanish doping affair, Operacion Puerto, in the build up to the race - including race favourites Ivan Basso and Jan Ullrich - Landis's implication is an indictment to the wishful claims that the 2006 race would be wholly "clean".

The latest uproar now means that the last event of each major Tour has been blighted by scandal.

The 2005 Vuelta A Espana "winner" Roberto Heras tested positive for EPO and had his title taken away, while May's Giro d'Italia winner Basso was suspended from this year's Tour following his reported involvement with Dr Eufemiano Fuentes's Madrid-based doping ring. As nothing has yet to be proven against the Italian, his maiden title remains.

It is not the first time that Landis's team Phonak have been dragged through the mud of doping: in 2004, American Tyler Hamilton, the Olympic time-trial champion, was banned for two years for blood doping. More recently, Colombian veteran Santiago Botero and Spaniard Jose Gutierrez, second in the Giro, were dismissed for drug use.

Phonak, a Swiss hearing aid company, had already decided to pull their sponsorship from the team due to the negative image of the sport in general, and their team in particular.

Both the team and Landis, who is due a hip-replacement operation, are said to be shocked at the result of the test. The statement read: "The team management and the rider were both totally surprised of this physiological result.

"The rider will ask in the upcoming days for the counter analysis to prove either that this result is coming from a natural process or that this is resulting from a mistake in the confirmation."

alamo50
07-27-2006, 02:51 PM
What a dissgrace to the sport, Armstrong and the USA.

timvp
07-27-2006, 03:17 PM
So I guess Lance Armstrong wasn't the super hero he was made out to be. He quits and then some other scrub takes over and wins.

Apology Accepted.



1. Landis isn't a scrub.


APOLOGY ACCEPTED.

:smokin

tlongII
07-27-2006, 04:08 PM
I wouldn't put it past the French to have set him up.

CubanMustGo
07-27-2006, 04:58 PM
Surprise: Landis denies doping allegations

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2006/writers/austin_murphy/07/27/landis.react/index.html?cnn=yes

Floyd Landis says he didn't do it -- didn't inject testosterone, didn't apply a testosterone patch to any part of his body. Floyd Landis just returned my call, and I asked him straight up: "Did you do it, bro?"

He said, "No, c'mon man," in what would turn out to be the first of several denials.

I want very badly to believe him.

Landis had been crying. Not for himself -- he'd just gotten off the phone with his mother, Arlene, who has been driven from the family home in Farmersville, Pa., by reporters scavenging for quotes. "I know it's their job," he said, sadly, "but they need to leave her out of this."

The A sample from the urine test to which he submitted after Stage 17 shows "an unusual level of testosterone/epitestosterone." Landis told me he "can't be hopeful" that the B sample will be any different than the A. "I'm a realist," he said.

Landis says that an elevated level of testosterone is different from a positive test. He says this is a fairly common problem among pro cyclists. He's retaining the services of a Spanish doctor named Luis Hernandez, who has helped other riders shown by tests to have elevated levels of testosterone. "In hundreds of cases," Landis told me, "no one's ever lost one."

It's too early to tell if he's going to be on solid footing or if he's clutching at straws. The next step, he says, is to submit to an endocrine test that may help him prove that he just happens to be a guy walking around with an inordinate amount of testosterone in his blood.

He raised the possibility that the cortisone shots he's been taking for his ravaged right hip -- the hip he'll soon have replaced -- may have had some effect on the test. Then he revealed this: "I've had a thyroid condition for the last year or so and have been taking small amounts of thyroid hormone. It's an oral dose, once a day."

He raised the possibility that that medication may have skewed the test that appears to damn him.

He knows how bad this looks, and told me, "I wouldn't hold it against somebody if they don't believe me."

I don't know what to believe. I was surprised he returned my call.

"You were there when nobody else was," he told me, "so I thought I'd better call you back."

He was talking about a visit I paid to the team bus a week ago today. The day before -- in what had been his lowest moment in many weeks -- Landis appeared to have ridden himself off the podium and out of the top 10. As the Tour had unfolded, as he'd taken the lead and then relinquished it, then cracked spectacularly, he had not seemed like a rider under the influence of performance-enhancing drugs. In fact, the French were down on him for racing too conservatively, for not attacking or going for stage wins.

The next morning I went by the Phonak team bus (as I wrote in my Tour dispatch a week ago). It was eerily deserted, Landis having already been dubbed irrelevant. He sat on the steps of the bus and we chatted. After his incredible ride that day, I was a little embarrassed by what I'd said: I told him I respected that he'd finished the stage, no matter how long it took. I told him I looked forward to seeing what he did in the final time trial -- something about silver linings.

He smiled, and told me, basically, that he expected to make up some of that time that afternoon. He told me he was feeling better.

He went out rode himself into the lore of the Tour.

What to make of that ride now?

Anyone who follows this sport and professes to be blindsided by allegations of this nature risks sounding like Captain Renault in Casablanca ("I'm shocked -- shocked! -- to find that gambling is going on in here!"). You wonder sometimes if, in cycling, the clean riders are not, in fact, the minority. The purge that marked the start of this race -- 13 riders were ejected after being implicated in a Spanish doping investigation called Operación Puerto -- confirmed cycling's status as one of the dirtiest sports in the world.

But there was this hope -- was it naive, Floyd? -- that les coureurs that they didn't kick out were riding clean. And Landis had such a wholesome, heroic story: the rebel from Pennsylvania Dutch country who carved a career for himself despite tall odds -- the disapproving parents; the three teams that folded beneath him, felled by bankruptcy; the bum hip, which caused him so much pain that after some stages last year, he came close to vomiting.

Even before Landis finished Stage 17, when he pulled back most of the time he had lost the previous day, the whispers had begun. Allen Lim, Landis' trainer, took pains in the days that followed to point out that the effort put forth by Landis in that heroic, Tour-saving stage was generally in line with "what he's done in training." The anomaly had been the bonk the previous day.

Then you read what German doctor Kurt Moosburger recently told Cyclingnews.com: "You can do a hard Alpine stage without doping. But after that, the muscles are exhausted. You need -- depending on your training conditions -- up to three days in order to regenerate."

To help recover, testosterone and human growth hormone can be used. "Both are made by the body and are therefore natural substances," he said. "They help to build muscle as well as in muscle recovery."

Dr. Moosburger explained how it was done. "You put a standard testosterone patch that is used for male hormone-replacement therapy on your scrotum and leave it there for about six hours. The small dose is not sufficient to produce a positive urine result in the doping test, but the body actually recovers faster."

It would be funny -- if it weren't heartbreaking -- to think that as he sat outside the team hotel last Wednesday night, explaining his collapse, Landis was already getting a little help from a patch on a tender part of his anatomy.

So I flat-out asked him if he'd done the patch thing, and he told me he hadn't. All he can do now is wait for the B sample and, after that, hope another test proves that he's in a very elevated percentile of men, who go through life with more than their share of testosterone.

Meanwhile, I've got this passage in my Tour story in this week's Sports Illustrated: "Landis' epic ride on July 19 did not just succeed beyond all expectations, putting him in striking distance of the lead, which he seized for good in the Tour's final time trial two days later. It provided a gleaming counterweight to the doping scandal that had overshadowed this Tour since the day before it began."

Gleaming counterweight. That phrase will mock me for months, if not longer, unless Landis is able to convince us that it's all a great misunderstanding.

Floyd says he didn't do it, and I want very badly to believe him.

mookie2001
07-27-2006, 08:09 PM
ROFL
whottt your owner dumped on you yet again

GrandeDavid
07-27-2006, 08:24 PM
That was an absolutely sick ride. I hope he can finish it off and win the damn thing.

That has to be one of the gutsiest single stage rides of all time. :tu

And here's to an American sticking it to the French, again!

Yeah, one helluva DOPE ass ride by Landis. :lol

Slinkyman
07-27-2006, 08:34 PM
Dude just has HUGE BALLS that explains why he had too much testosterone.

whottt
07-27-2006, 09:22 PM
ROFL
whottt your owner dumped on you yet again



You'd find life easier if you'd just go ahead and get your lips surgically attatched to Chump's butt.

Extra Stout
07-28-2006, 10:27 AM
:lmao the americian hero, a cheater.

what else is new?

Exactly!

Sincerely,
Ben Johnson

IceColdBrewski
07-28-2006, 10:43 AM
I wouldn't put it past the French to have set him up.

This was my first thought as well. They did everything they could to taint Armstrong's name. You just know that another American winning the tour had many smelly Frenchies (and a lot of other Europeans for that matter) ready to jump off the nearest bridge. They just can't stand the fact that Americans find the sport of cycling boring, yet still manage to dominate its biggest event. :D


ESPN's cycling reporter was on the radio a couple of days ago. According to his report, Landis' testosterone was not high at all. It was the ratio of his testosterone to his epitestosterone. The guy said if that is all it was, it would probably go to the world doping court and Landis would probably be vindicated. He said this because this test is highly controversial and really shows no evidence of drugs or wrong doing.

If his testosterone level was high that is another story but it was completely normal and actually a bit low. The day of his collapse he said he drank beer which can cause a jump in the ratios. Anyway, he said this test is nothing like testing positive for a banned drug. Completely different.

Just repeating what I heard. Don't know if what he said is 100% correct or not. He thought Landis would keep the title.

johngateswhiteley
07-28-2006, 11:02 AM
...i am withholding judgement until the second test. however, it is important to note, as already listed above, that it is just an elevated level of testosterone RATIO, not really failing a drug test. the media are jumping all over this and making it appear to be something it is not.

LEONARD
07-28-2006, 12:13 PM
...i am withholding judgement until the second test. however, it is important to note, as already listed above, that it is just an elevated level of testosterone RATIO, not really failing a drug test. the media are jumping all over this and making it appear to be something it is not.

Exactly...

LEONARD
07-28-2006, 12:15 PM
This was my first thought as well. They did everything they could to taint Armstrong's name. You just know that another American winning the tour had many smelly Frenchies (and a lot of other Europeans for that matter) ready to jump off the nearest bridge. They just can't stand the fact that Americans find the sport of cycling boring, yet still manage to dominate its biggest event. :D


ESPN's cycling reporter was on the radio a couple of days ago. According to his report, Landis' testosterone was not high at all. It was the ratio of his testosterone to his epitestosterone. The guy said if that is all it was, it would probably go to the world doping court and Landis would probably be vindicated. He said this because this test is highly controversial and really shows no evidence of drugs or wrong doing.

If his testosterone level was high that is another story but it was completely normal and actually a bit low. The day of his collapse he said he drank beer which can cause a jump in the ratios. Anyway, he said this test is nothing like testing positive for a banned drug. Completely different.

Just repeating what I heard. Don't know if what he said is 100% correct or not. He thought Landis would keep the title.

I heard the same thing this morning on the radio...one of the local hosts is a cycling nut...

IceColdBrewski
07-28-2006, 04:08 PM
...i am withholding judgement until the second test.

I'm withholding judgement until everything plays out. Apparently, the reason this test is so controversial is because there are several natural things that can cause "unusual testosterone ratios."

Unlike a lot of other cylclists who are accused of cheating, Landis has said that he will undergo any test neccessary to clear his name. If he really was cheating, they should find traces of artificial testosterone in his blood.

Budkin
07-28-2006, 09:00 PM
What really sucks is that even if he is innocent he's not going to be able to celebrate his victory as he should be able to. He's already cancelled his appearance on Leno and will probably have to cancel more events. It's like the victory is tainted now.

Aggie Hoopsfan
07-28-2006, 09:30 PM
Typical French fags, can't stand an American winning. Fuck 'em.

ChumpDumper
07-28-2006, 09:34 PM
When are the second results supposed to come out?

MannyIsGod
07-28-2006, 10:00 PM
I don't need to see the 2nd results to know this is bullshit yet again. Dude, what is it with the French and getting so pissed at American's winning their stupid event? Seriously.

Aggie Hoopsfan
07-28-2006, 11:34 PM
:lol Amen, Manny.

Fuck, I got elevated testosterone levels when the women of Spurstalk had their bravatar campaign going on.

Doesn't mean I was doping :lol

Samr
07-29-2006, 07:38 AM
I posted this on a biking forum that I semi-frequent. Here's my take:


Today I read the news in the paper, and almost wet myself laughing when I read the specifics. My situation, in the testing-sense, is almost identical, albeit with different circumstances, to Floyd's. I beg you, please, someone point out a flaw in this logic. I will be happy to admitt I am wrong.

About a week ago I was given both a blood and a urine test for testosterone. The reason I was being tested for this revolved around bone density (or rather, lack thereof), which is a direct product of testosterone levels. The night before the appointment, and subsequent test, I had taken an over-the-counter steroid, which used testosterone, for lifting. I was unaware the test would take place the following day, and as such I asked the doctor if this previous dose of testosterone would have any effect on my test results. He told me that it wouldn't, and that I would have had to have a history of consistent consumption of the extra testosterone for it to show on the tests.

So here's the parallel:

Previous tests did not show high levels of testosterone. Now, this is working under the assumption that these tests occured more recent than a time period that would allow a "history of consistent consumption," but logic and understanding of race procedures leads me to believe that if there was a "history of consistent consumption," it would have shown on prior tests. Ok, so we have established that he would have had to taken it either a few days, or imediately, prior to the stage in question. And let's, for the sake of arguement, say that he did. Given this shortened time period, his body would not have had time to register and develope a thoroughly higher level of testosterone, i.e. it's not going to show up on the test if he took it only immediately before, which would be the only possibly scenario given that past tests did not have possitive results. In addition, if he did have a consistently higher level of testosterone, it would have showed up on tests AFTER the test in question as well. In order to prove a possitive result, there would have to be a consistent string of possitive tests, because the very nature of testosterone says that it does not immediately enter then leave your body.

Or in shorter terms, Floyd's test is either faulty, or the prior tests were faulty, because there is no way he could take a small ammount of dosages and have it show up on only one test. The entire logic to the allegations revolves around a series of blatant contradictions.

Nevermind what is "good for the sport," or any personal bias one might have. The understood facts do not add up. And unless someone points out a flaw in my logic, which I acknowledge there might be (much in the same way one should acknowledge there will be flaws in drug testing), I am not going to believe any of this.

Of course, this is just one of the many facets on arguement against the test. He could have a naturally high testosterone level, much in the same way my doctors believe I have a naturally low one; the alcohol he consumed the night before, in the quantities of "two beers and at least four shots of whiskey" (his words), has been scientifically proven to elevate testosterone, though they have not developed a sufficient ammout of data to prove precisely how high; the actual lab that did the tests was the same one that was famously proven both wrong and suspecious of other agendas in Lance Armstrong's L'Equipe ordeal, etc.

This entire thing wreaks of a French bias. This isn't the Salem Witch Trials. This is 2006, and we have enough data and scientific studies to backup that data to prove, at least for the time being, that this is a gross overreaction. You are innocent until proven guilty. Or at least here, in United States.

Just one of the many reasons I am proud to be an American.

Samr
07-29-2006, 07:41 AM
Although Stephen Colbert has an interesting take. (http://youtube.com/watch?v=KkR_IXrXO8g&search=Colbert%20Landis%20)

velik_m
07-29-2006, 11:43 AM
well you have a point, but sudden spike could be the result of blood doping (swaping blood).

ChumpDumper
07-29-2006, 03:28 PM
I don't think there is Franch bias here. The rules are set by the UCI, which isn't even based in France. They can't take any positive test lightly because doping has been rampant thoughout the sport. It looks like there are enough mitigating reasons for the UCI to allow Floyd to keep his title; my best guess is that's what will happen.
well you have a point, but sudden spike could be the result of blood doping (swaping blood).I guess that's possible, but I thought blood swapping was done to boost red blood cell levels.

Aggie Hoopsfan
07-29-2006, 05:16 PM
Actually it's come out today that the lab that all of a sudden came up with a positive test on Landis is the same one that was playing circle jerk with L'Equipe back when they claimed Lance tested positive.

Kind of an interesting trend, but a pathetic one.

IceColdBrewski
07-29-2006, 06:16 PM
Actually it's come out today that the lab that all of a sudden came up with a positive test on Landis is the same one that was playing circle jerk with L'Equipe back when they claimed Lance tested positive.

Kind of an interesting trend, but a pathetic one.



Yep. This lab already has a shady history when it comes to American cyclists. How anyone cannot be suspect about them being involved in this Landis situation is suprising. Here's an interesting piece that I found.




J'accuse !
by
Ilan Vardi
Version française de cet article



The accusations brought against Lance Armstrong in L'Equipe on August 23, 2005, have no scientific or legal merit. In particular, The protocol of anonymity of samples and the requirement to test an A and B sample was designed to

· Maintain scientific correctness

· Protect the rights of athletes

In this case, the protocol was not followed which means that the test reported by L'Equipe has no scientific validity and that the disclosure of the results violates the rights of the athlete in question. Everyone agrees with this, since it has been acknowledged that no legal or sporting sanction can be pursued. Therefore, the L'Equipe article and its general acceptance in the French press is simply a precedent for disregarding scientific principles as well as disregarding athletes' rights. An in depth look at the ethical consequences of this incident is given in this article by Tim Maloney. Therefore, there are no facts to discuss here, only illegal methods used to tarnish the reputation of the most dominant Tour de France rider of all time.

Since no charges can be brought against Armstrong, it is clear that he has no need to defend himself against these spurious accusations. However, one can surely believe in his complete innocence. For example, it would be very risky to use EPO during the post Festina Affair Tour de France, when police raids were considered inevitable, as was expressed by his team mate Jonathan Vaughters. As he has shown in his Tour de France victories, Lance Armstrong has left very little to chance. Another reason was given by Armstrong himself: After beating cancer and making cancer research and recovery his number one goal in life, it would be ridiculous to once again put his health in danger.

If one does believe in Armstrong's innocence, then what is one to make of the positive EPO tests reported in L'Equipe? After some thought, the O.J. Simpson case comes to mind, in which the possibility of tampering with evidence was a key point leading to acquittal. However, in the O.J. Simpson case, there was so much evidence that a large number of otherwise trustworthy individuals would have had to independently decide to frame O.J. Simpson. In this case, the number of people required to tamper with the evidence is much smaller, and the possibility of wrong doing much greater, since the procedure by which L'Equipe obtained their evidence was itself fraudulent. In particular, the informant who gave them the correspondence between anonymous samples at the Chatenay Malabry laboratory is already guilty of serious breach of ethics, as is the person who allowed them to examine the Chatenay Malabry documentation, which was guaranteed anonymity for all scientific and legal purposes. Therefore, there are two people who are already guilty of serious misconduct and either one could have easily tampered with evidence in order to frame Lance Armstrong.

My suspicions about tampering in order to frame Armstrong were first raised by purely phenomenological issues: The L'Equipe article was immediately accepted as fact by the French media, indicating to me that the climate was ripe for this information to be believed without further scrutiny. As every forger knows, one sells fakes to people who desperately want to believe them real. The second element is that the revelations happened just after Armstrong's retirement, considerably decreasing the possibility of legal action on his part or by other organisations finding fault with the articles. Finally, the publication of the articles just a month after Armstrong's retirement assured that the object of the attack would not be a faded memory. In other words, the article came at a time when it would get the most attention with the least amount of formal scrutiny.

Since the testing protocol involving A and B samples and anonymity was designed to eliminate the possibility of tampering, one can no longer exclude tampering in this case, where the protocol was not followed. Moreover, tampering with a cyclist's drug sample is a distinct possibility given the fact that it has recently occured in France. In 2004, French cyclist Cedric Vasseur proved that his positive test for cocaine performed at the request of the French police was false and that his signature on a police report while in custody was forged by the police.

If one believes that tampering occurred then the natural question is the identity of the perpetrator or perpetrators. In my opinion, there is one outstanding candidate, the person who has shown the least amount of professional ethics in a profession requiring the highest standard of ethics, that is, Jacques de Ceaurriz, director of the Anti Doping laboratory of Chatenay Malabry. Indeed, he has never expressed any objection that confidential research material from his institute was surreptitiously examined by newspaper reporters. Nor has he brought up any objection that the scientific and legal protocol for proving a doping offence, in which his institute plays the central role, was totally violated. On the contrary, he provided a statement to L'Equipe that was published alongside their original articles, confirming their findings. Even this statement runs contrary to scientific ethics -- he gives a subjective opinion about the validity of the institute's EPO test on frozen samples, without having any scientific basis (no study of the validity of EPO testing on long term frozen samples exists) and without qualifying his opinion as being devoid of empirical basis. Such qualification is important in order to maintain a scientific standard of rigour and also to communicate uncertainty to laymen who might otherwise take a scientist's word as fact. However, any such qualification would completely negate the impact of his assertion that his EPO test is 100% reliable even on long frozen samples. This assertion of perfection is itself ludicrous, since it contradicts the use of a protocol involving multiple samples established exactly for the purposes of minimising the inevitable possibility of false results. Note that a scientist can be reasonably expected to give his opinion on matters which he does not fully understand, if the issues are innocuous, but not when his opinion directly harms a public personality and is stated as if it had full scientific value.

As the previous paragraph shows, Jacques de Ceaurriz has validated a newspaper article which violates the very principles on which the institute's research is based and has passed off his personal opinion as scientific fact. Therefore, I do not find it such a stretch of the imagination that he was somehow involved in tampering with samples. At the very least, I now believe it quite likely that he gave personal permission to the L'Equipe reporters to examine the privileged documents belonging to his institute. Already, this would be such a breach of ethics that it would require his immediate dismissal as director (I believe that his lack of interest in the misconduct that has occurred at his laboratory should already be grounds for disciplinary action against him). It also seems possible that he is aware of the person who gave the correspondence between the anonymous sample numbers and the athletes, probably someone at the French Cycling Federation, which is one of the only places where the correspondence between the anonymous samples and the athletes could be known.

If any one of the above conjectures is correct, then one must wonder how the director of a respected institute could get involved in such mischief. I believe that the answer, as usual, comes down to human weakness, and that the director fell victim to exactly the same temptations as the dopers he has made his living trying to catch. In particular, the director of a French research institute makes somewhere in the vicinity of $100,000 a year, a paltry figure compared to his American counterparts who make ten times as much, and laughable compared to Lance Armstrong who makes on the order of one hundred times as much. Surely this difference in finances can bear heavily on someone coming close to retirement and an investigation into his private life might provide some surprises and clues. Secondly, and perhaps more importantly, the Institute's EPO test has been his life's work, even though he himself did not do the research, and his laboratory gained world wide notoriety with the acceptance of its test as the standard for finding EPO doping as these articles attest


However, even here his ethical standards are found wanting. Indeed, another laboratory in Lyon has accused Jacques de Ceaurriz and his laboratory of illegally appropriating the EPO test for themselves. The research leading to the EPO test was done by Francoise Lasne first at the Hopitaux de Lyon and then at the Chatenay Malabry laboratory. However, the Lyon laboratory applied for a patent in 1998 and Christian Collombel, the director of the Laboratoire des Hospice Civils de Lyon, has accused Jacques de Ceaurriz of appropriating the test for himself by manipulating the media. A full article is given here. Manipulation of the media in order to steal an EPO test along with the his unethical stance in the L'Equipe affair (and subsequent media attention) certainly opens the door to even more serious misconduct.

I hope that Jacques de Ceaurriz reads this article. I am certain that his reaction would be outrage at being accused without there being any tangible proof. At the very least, if he is innocent of the more serious charges I bring up, he would realise the difficult position Armstrong has been put in as a result of the L'Equipe articles, which de Ceaurriz has supported against all the principles of his profession. Moreover, he would realise that any defence he brings up could be used to defend Lance Armstrong, since any procedural gaps in my accusations are already present in the L’Equipe articles which he supports.

When I first saw the L'Equipe article, my reaction was that France had found a new Dreyfus. Indeed, over a century ago, France was not ready to believe that a Jew could have a successful and honest military career, and in 2005 France cannot accept an American with a successful and honest Tour de France career. Even when he was completely disgraced, Dreyfus still declared “Vive la France !” just as Armstrong himself, in response to his media critics, declared “Vive le Tour !” just one month ago. No, what France needs now is a new Zola.

I'm usually not a conspiracy theorist. But when it comes to the French and their labs, my bullshit detector starts working overtime.

timvp
07-29-2006, 07:11 PM
Man the bike homers in this thread are embarrassing. Yeah the French hate us but they can't and won't make up failed drug tests. The tests are there to be had and the truth that this scrub was a cheater will be official soon.

Landis talks like a liar when he's sitting there trying to explain it away. He cheated, he got caught, game over.

For us in the US, it's better this scrub got caught than them every able to catch Lance.

IceColdBrewski
07-29-2006, 10:57 PM
Man the bike homers in this thread are embarrassing. Yeah the French hate us but they can't and won't make up failed drug tests. The tests are there to be had and the truth that this scrub was a cheater will be official soon.

Landis talks like a liar when he's sitting there trying to explain it away. He cheated, he got caught, game over.

We'll see. But I'll wait for all the facts to come out if that's OK with you. Just because you call "game over" doesn't make it so. :rolleyes


And as far as this particular French doping lab being above corruption or human error, try telling that to Lance Armstrong.

And for the record, I'm not a "cycling homer." There's just nothing better to talk about.

Obstructed_View
07-30-2006, 10:31 AM
Landis talks like a liar when he's sitting there trying to explain it away. He cheated, he got caught, game over.

I agree completely. I actually thought he was being railroaded until I heard his lame ass explanation. He's either a bad liar or he got some abysmal advice on what to say. At least he finally gave the country of France and Greg Lemond what they wanted.

IceColdBrewski
07-30-2006, 11:22 AM
I agree completely. I actually thought he was being railroaded until I heard his lame ass explanation. He's either a bad liar or he got some abysmal advice on what to say. At least he finally gave the country of France and Greg Lemond what they wanted.

What "lame ass explanation" was that? Care to elaborate? All I heard him say is that his body naturally produced this "unusual testosterone ratio." If you think that qualifies as a "lame ass explanation", I suggest you educate yourself a little more on testosterone.

If Floyd is found guilty (after the usual barrage of tests), I'll be the first to condemn him. Part of me believes that he probably is guilty. Cycling has to be the dirtiest sport on the planet the way everyone always talks about the doping problem it has. But the fact still remains that this is the same lab that leaked and/or doctored Armstrong's old test samples. I can't help but raise an eyebrow in their direction as well.

Obstructed_View
07-31-2006, 03:24 PM
What "lame ass explanation" was that? Care to elaborate? All I heard him say is that his body naturally produced this "unusual testosterone ratio."
http://www.postchronicle.com/news/original/article_21231401.shtml

In a Sports Illustrated interview, Landis is quoted as saying that the test results reflect a naturally high level of testosterone or were caused by medications he is taking for a degenerated hip condition.

That there flies right in the face of what you claim to have heard about an "unusual testosterone ratio" . Therefore, since Landis is claiming something that is completely unrelated to what flagged his test in the first place, it sounds lame to me. You are welcome to withhold judgment; I'm sure Landis is grateful for that. I'll keep expressing my opinion, if it's all the same to you.

CubanMustGo
07-31-2006, 04:04 PM
The problem with the "UTR" explanation is that it should have shown up in all the tests, not just the one on the day he did so amazingly well. If his body has this problem it should be fairly consistent, not 11:1 one day and 2:1 the next ...

Pisses me off because I would love this not to be true, but it seems really unlikely. For crying out loud he also said he had a beer that day which would have made things worse. Only one beer the entire tour?

Samr
07-31-2006, 08:08 PM
I am not a Floyd Landis homer. I am a Team Discovery homer. And as such, I am generally required to hate Landis due to the ill will in the past between him and Armstrong. Part of me hopes he is caught doping, and part of me believes it is true. His explanation sounds a bit shaky. If it weren't for one issue:

You CANNOT take testosterone the day before X Event and have unusually high testosterone levels in a test immediately after X Event. You CANNOT take steroids or anything else that may increase testosterone, especially to the given extreme, and NOT have it show up in a series of tests. I know this because, as of right now, I am currently being tested for testosterone levels. And the day before, not knowing I had a test the next day, I took a steroid that boosts testosterone levels. And guess what? It changes nothing.

The ONLY plausible explanation is that the test they were doing was looking for abnormalities to indicate a different form of doping, and a high testosterone level was one of the indicators. For example, let's say Doping Method Q is undetectable, directly, by tests, but as a side effect, the Vitamin D and calcium levels in the urine rise noticably (this is all hypothetical). So in order to test for Doping Method Q, the WADA looks for abnormal Vitamin D and calcium levels as an indicator. This is a good indicator that the athlete in question has doped/juiced, but it is not proof. In order to find a solution (possitive test results), you first need to have proof of a problem.

Landis has plenty of ways, both historical and hypothetical, to validate a legal jump in testosterone. Too many factors work in his favor. My hope, as a Team Disco fan, is that he did dope. But logic tells me it's something else.

CubanMustGo
07-31-2006, 09:30 PM
Samr, looks like you may have gotten your wish:

http://sports.espn.go.com/oly/cycling/news/story?id=2535787

Landis reportedly had synthetic testosterone in system
Associated Press

NEW YORK -- Tests show that some of the testosterone in Floyd Landis' system at the Tour de France was synthetic and not naturally produced by his body as he claimed, according to a newspaper report.

The French antidoping lab testing the American cyclist's samples determined that some of the hormone came from an external source, The New York Times reported on its Web site Monday night, citing a person at the International Cycling Union with knowledge of the result.

The finding undermines the defense that Landis has stood behind since he tested positive for an elevated ratio of testosterone to epitestosterone following the 17th stage of the Tour de France, where he staged a stirring comeback in the Alps to make up for a poor performance the day before.

Looking and sounding defiant, Landis said Friday that his body's natural metabolism -- not doping of any kind -- caused the result and that he would undergo tests to prove it.

"We will explain to the world why this is not a doping case but a natural occurrence," Landis said at a news conference in Madrid, Spain.

But after determining that Landis's ratio of testosterone to epitestosterone was more than twice the limit of 4:1, the lab performed a carbon isotope ratio test on the first of Landis's two urine samples, the person told the Times.

That test determines whether the testosterone it is natural or synthetic.

Landis officially requested the testing of his backup urine sample Monday for an elevated testosterone ratio. If the "B" test is negative, Landis would be cleared. If it's positive, which Landis' lawyers say they expect, he could be stripped of his Tour victory and banned for two years.

The Times reported that Landis was in New York on Monday night and could not be reached for comment.

Budkin
07-31-2006, 09:33 PM
Well, I would say that he was fucked but then again I wouldn't be surprised if the French framed him either. He's fucked either way. :depressed

Samr
07-31-2006, 10:11 PM
After those results, apparently written with no journalistic bias, and by a neutral party, I am now erring more on the side of guilt, though nothing yet has been proven.

If the tests can detect the PRESENCE of synthetic testosterone, but not necessarily or consequently the ammount, as was suggested, then Landis can go to hell as far as I'm concerned. IF the tests were conducted as suggested.

Don't get me wrong, I love to win, at almost all costs. But there is no joy in winning if you don't win within the rules. I'd rather finish last and fair than first by cheating.

timvp
08-01-2006, 02:22 AM
Apologies Accepted.

Streakyshooter08
08-01-2006, 10:47 AM
When are the second results supposed to come out?

As far as I know august 5th...

Bruno
08-02-2006, 05:40 AM
Not only do I think I know what the French people think...

But evidentally I can read French better than you...

Remember your link to the "hair" sample drug test?


When I say that it was a hair drug test, it was without looking at an article but from my memories.
It was a piss test but it's just a detail.
The fact that it was hair or piss that was analysed isn't the core of the debate.



No seriously...you need to, if you can't figure out why some of us well read Americans are offended...you are in serious denial.

And the current relations between our countries are only part of the reason.

You don't fit the "well read Americans" description.
The fact that you point french people in a argument about cycling is a proof of that.



It also doesn't mean you have a clue what the fuck you are talking about, either with regards to Lance's alleged Drug Test Failures...or the history between our two countries.

:lol
I owned you badly on Armstrong's thread and you say that I'm clueless. Your only point is that I say hair instead of piss while I owned you on every aspects.

Aggie Hoopsfan
08-02-2006, 07:58 AM
Synthetic testosterone... it wouldn't surprise me if one of the lab punks dropped some into his sample. We're still talking about the same lab that tried to frame Lance.

boutons_
08-02-2006, 09:49 AM
August 2, 2006

Experts Say Case Against Landis Is Tough to Beat

By JULIET MACUR and GINA KOLATA

After spending several days in New York, Floyd Landis has returned home to Southern California, where he will await his fate as Tour de France champion. But antidoping officials working on his case already have evidence that some experts say is convincing enough to show that Landis cheated to win the Tour, regardless of further testing or appeals.

Landis, 30, provided a urine sample after winning Stage 17 in the Alps with a long solo attack. That day, he climbed back into contention for the victory after a miserable performance a day earlier.

The results of two types of tests have thrown Landis’s status into doubt. One of them, a sophisticated measure called a carbon isotope ratio test, will be difficult, if not impossible, for Landis to refute. The test examines the atomic makeup of testosterone in the urine and can determine if it is natural or synthetic.

Landis failed that test, according to a person inside the International Cycling Union with knowledge of the results. Landis’s personal doctor, Brent Kay, confirmed the finding.

The cycling union said it expected the results of a test on Landis’s backup urine sample by Saturday morning, Paris time. If that test comes back positive, Landis would be stripped of his Tour title and would probably be suspended from cycling for two years. If the test comes back negative, the case would be dropped.

A screening on the backup sample will also aim to confirm the ratio of testosterone to epitestosterone in the urine, which is the other type of test used in the case. The initial testing found a level of 11 to 1, well above the World Anti-Doping Agency’s limit of 4 to 1.

Several experts said the carbon isotope test ultimately mattered more than the T/E test because it shows that some of the testosterone found in the sample came from an outside source, not from a natural process in Landis’s body.

“It’s powerful evidence that’s pretty definitive,” said David Cowan, a professor at King’s College London and the director of the Drug Control Center in London, which is accredited by WADA. “That in itself is enough to pursue a case.”

In Landis’s case, the French national antidoping laboratory in Châtenay-Malabry performed the testing — not Cowan’s lab.

Still, Cowan said, most lab directors are careful to build a case against an athlete on much more than just one positive test, no matter how definitive a single test might be. A doping case in sports is treated like a criminal case, he said, with carefully gathered and documented evidence. He said the scientists at his laboratory retested a sample several times before announcing their results to the athlete and the authorities involved. He said they wanted to make sure their positive result was correct before moving on to the backup sample.

Landis said last week that he was expecting the worst because backup samples, or B samples, almost always confirm the initial result. But Kay said the B sample could come back negative.

“The carbon isotope was only mildly elevated,” he said. “We know, from a statistical standpoint, that the first result could have been a false positive.”

Testosterone can be administered by injection, pill, gel or time-released patch, like those mentioned in the Spanish doping scandal that implicated nearly 60 cyclists and others in the sport before this year’s Tour. Landis has denied using testosterone or any performance-enhancing drugs.

Nonetheless, Dr. Gary I. Wadler, an antidoping expert and associate professor at the New York University School of Medicine, said the evidence against Landis, taken as a whole, “would be hard to beat.”

He added: “Phase 1 was finding evidence from his body fluid that a doping violation occurred, and we have that. I don’t know how he will get around that.”

The carbon isotope test is used to look for testosterone abuse, and it came into use about six years ago, when companies produced equipment sensitive enough to do the test in urine samples.

It can cost about $300 more to test an athlete’s urine sample, but antidoping labs routinely use it when they have reason to suspect that an athlete was taking testosterone.

The test starts with an isolation of testosterone from the athlete’s urine. Then chemists determine the makeup of the carbon atoms that form the backbone of testosterone.

Ordinarily, carbon atoms are made up of six protons and six neutrons, giving them an atomic weight of 12. But occasionally, they have an extra neutron, giving them an atomic weight of 13.

By chance, soy plants are the source of most pharmaceutical testosterone. They tend to have slightly less carbon-13 than other plants that are more abundant in the human diet. Humans make testosterone from the food they eat, so their testosterone typically has more carbon-13 than the testosterone that drug companies synthesize from soy.

But these differences are tiny.

The test determines whether the testosterone in the athlete’s urine has less carbon-13 than another naturally occurring hormone in the urine, like cholesterol. The test is considered positive when the carbon isotope ratio — the amount of carbon-13 compared to carbon-12 — is three or more units higher in the athlete’s testosterone than it is in the comparison hormone. It is evidence that the testosterone in the urine was not made by the athlete’s body. Landis’s difference was 3.99, according to his own doctor.

“For me, that would be it,” said Donald H. Catlin, who runs the Olympic drug-testing laboratory at U.C.L.A.

The test could not, however, determine if someone had tampered with the urine sample or was negligent.

The lab that conducted the testing on Landis’s samples has previously been criticized for its handling of samples.

L’Équipe, a French sports newspaper, reported that samples taken from Lance Armstrong during the 1999 Tour de France were analyzed at the lab. Several of those samples, which were supposed to be used for research purposes only, later tested positive for EPO, an endurance-boosting drug.

The International Cycling Union commissioned a report that later cleared Armstrong of the doping allegations, partly because of the way the lab had handled the results. Armstrong lashed out at the lab, too.

But Christiane Ayotte, director of an antidoping lab in Montreal, said that the standards were lower for handling samples for research.

“It’s not fair to criticize them because of that,” she said. “When we’re talking about a routine analysis, the lab in Paris does high-quality work.”

Copyright 2006 The New York Times Company

velik_m
08-05-2006, 04:47 AM
Landis returns positive B sample

Floyd Landis is set to lose his Tour de France title and faces a two-year ban after returning a positive B sample for excessive levels of testosterone.

The American's Phonak team dismissed Landis on Saturday when it was confirmed he produced levels more than twice the legal limit after stage 17.

Landis, 30, has said the high levels detected were a "natural occurrence".

He would be the first Tour winner to lose his title, with Spaniard Oscar Pereiro set to be declared the winner.

Pereiro was second overall behind Landis in the race, which finished in Paris on 23 July, and would become the first Spaniard to win the Tour since Miguel Indurain in 1995.

Landis said in a statement: "I have never taken any banned substance, including testosterone.

"I was the strongest man at the Tour de France, and that is why I am the champion."

A Phonak statement said: "Landis will be dismissed without notice for violating the teams internal Code of Ethics.

"Landis will continue to have legal options to contest the findings. However, this will be his personal affair and the Phonak team will no longer be involved in that."

The analysis of Landis' B sample took place at France's national laboratory at Chatenay-Malabry in the presence of the American's Spanish lawyer, Jose Maria Buxeda, and experts from the United States Anti-Doping Agency (USADA) and the International Cycling Union (UCI).

"In accordance to the anti-doping rules, the Anti-Doping Commission of the UCI will request that the USA Cycling Federation open a disciplinary procedure against the rider," the UCI said in a statement.

According to the good behaviour charter of professional cycling, Landis would not be allowed into a Pro Tour team for a further two years.

He now has 10 days to respond to the documents that are provided, according to USADA rules.

Landis' lawyers could then take the matter to the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS).

Those documents, Landis's response and any documents USADA would provide will go to a review panel some time after the 10 days.

The review panel will make a recommendation whether or not there is a case. USADA, based on that recommendation, will then decide whether to charge Landis.

If USADA does charge him, he will have an opportunity to contest that decision and the recommended sanction before a US panel of judges.

The American's future was already uncertain given he is due to have a hip replacement operation shortly.

Speaking in Madrid last week, he said the testosterone was "absolutely natural and produced by my own organism".

Landis was expecting the second sample to return a similar result to the first but last week insisted he was innocent.


"We will explain to the world why this is not a doping case but a natural occurrence," he said.

"I would like to (make it) absolutely clear that I'm not in any doping process. In this particular case, nobody can talk about doping."

Landis produced one of the most memorable displays in Tour history when he stormed to victory on the 17th stage of the Tour into Morzine by almost six minutes.

The win put him back into contention for the yellow jersey a day after his chances looked to have evaporated when he cracked on the final climb of stage 16.

But a two-year ban could spell the end of his career.
Story from BBC SPORT:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/sport2/hi/other_sports/cycling/5233476.stm

Published: 2006/08/05 08:44:42 GMT

johngateswhiteley
08-05-2006, 06:04 AM
geez. he may win the appeal.

T-Pain
08-05-2006, 10:47 AM
damn you floyd

Bob Lanier
08-05-2006, 01:46 PM
Fucking French - the French are responsible for all the wars in the world.

Oh, and :lmao

timvp
08-05-2006, 02:12 PM
Don't worry, Floyd. I believe your Jack Daniel's excuse and your dehydration excuse. Maybe it was a massage gone wrong?

I'm sure he wasn't just a juiced up scrub.

:smokin

IceColdBrewski
08-05-2006, 02:49 PM
Breaking News:

Landis declares war on France for spiking his urine samples. France promptly surrenders; agrees to change its name from France to "Those wine drinking, cheese eating surrender monkeys in Europe." Also agrees to change the name of the Tour de France to "Americans own this race bitches!" No word on whether or not they'll agree to finally start using deodorant. Stay tuned.

T-Pain
08-06-2006, 12:39 AM
god damn u floyd

rasho8
08-06-2006, 06:17 AM
Excuses won't mask the truth about Landis
Kreidler
By Mark Kreidler
Special to ESPN.com
Archive

"I'm going to do my best to defend my dignity and my innocence."
-- Floyd Landis, on CNN.

Oh, sure, it looks like a set-up line now, but back when Landis uttered those words to Larry King, in the heady nostalgia of … well, of last week, Floyd and his "team" had yet to offer up the first in his growing line of explanations for testing red-hot on the Cheat-to-Win scale.

By the time the cyclist's sizzling "B" sample finally came back from the French lab on Saturday, the Landis dog-ate-my-exonerating-evidence excuse list had grown to at least four, each more fantastic than the last.

If it wasn't cortisone shots or thyroid medication, maybe it was beer and whiskey. If it wasn't Landis' natural ability to produce testosterone at, apparently, Clooney-esque levels, maybe it was a combination of dehydration and "maximum effort," as one of Landis' Spanish lawyers suggested hopefully Friday.

I'm no lab coat, but Landis' testosterone-to-epitestosterone level, which has an allowable ratio of up to 4:1 under WADA rules, reportedly came up at 11:1 in his July 20 test. Isn't that sort of like blowing a .22 on ye olde breathalyzer in a state with a .08 legal alcohol limit? That's some serious maximum effort.

Still, a grudging acknowledgement here. A grudging respect for a guy who absolutely won't give it up, a guy willing to grasp at any explanation available -- anything that gives Landis even one more day's reprieve from the full weight of a decided public opinion -- no matter how ludicrous it sounds or how laughably flimsy it proves to be.

I can't help it: There's a part of me that admires the audacity of it all.

Americans still go so big, don't they? They just do. Landis is part of this classic international sport and certainly a multinational cycling team, and yet in his time of crisis he reverts to pure Americana: He's barreling out of the chute with everything he's got.

He is seizing on everything, every little scrap of a possibility. It's just a wild fight for his name. And, significantly, Landis and his people are willing to assume that the U.S. citizenry is absolutely the most willfully ignorant group of sports fans on the face of the earth -- that maybe we'll buy the beer-and-whiskey explanation because, hell, why not? It isn't as though we haven't swallowed some whoppers before.

That much, of itself, is resolutely American. From Barry Bonds' flaxseed oil to Justin Gatlin's evil masseuse, we've had just about every possible explanation for cheating thrown our way. Don't think Landis' advisers aren't aware of how often it seems to work, even if only well enough to buy a little time.

I'm old school, in the sense that I've been writing about sports for more than 18 months and I actually report from time to time. My favorite drug-excuse memory dates to the Sydney Olympics in 2000, when shot-putter C.J. Hunter sat before a roomful of reporters alongside his then-wife, Marion Jones, and fought back tears as he said he couldn't explain how he had tested positive for steroids -- four times -- that summer.

His "nutritionist," though, had a very good idea. This heretofore unknown man, on hand for the news conference, explained that Hunter's iron supplements must have been spiked, which is how Hunter came to have in his system levels of the steroid nandrolone that were 1,000 times the allowable limit.

That nutritionist? Why, it was our good friend Victor Conte, who would go on to star in his own sports production, "BALCO, Barry and Me: The Destruction of a Superstar." In the end, the Hunter deal was a total fraud, a dog and pony show. But I'll tell you what: C.J. Hunter's tears that day looked real all the same.

They also planted at least a few seeds of doubt -- you know, sort of like just needing one juror to vote for acquittal -- and there was a lesson there, too. All these years later, Floyd Landis and his crew are chipping away at that same lesson.

Go for the tiny shards of doubt. In this case, seize upon the fact that the other Landis tests during the race -- Landis says there were eight of them -- all came back negative. You start down that road, and the doubt creeps in: Does it really make sense that Landis' readings suddenly would go flying off the chart in the middle of the Tour de France? Are we being held captive to the limits of what information Landis and WADA have made public? Is it simply a Landis smokescreen, or does he have a legitimate basis for challenging a single abnormal result?

No matter. To Landis and his folks, the important thing is that Americans, as a sports group, have become so immersed in the drug-excuse culture that nothing is going to strike them as too stupidly impossible to proffer as a semi-explanation of what, in the end, might have happened. And that's enough. That is where the possibility lies, the shadow of a doubt.

It lies in our willingness. We'll consider pretty much anything, evidently, which means anything is worth a shot. Maybe even a shot and a beer

sabar
08-07-2006, 05:24 AM
Anyone has high testosterone in the presence of the french!
Kidding.

Idiotic thing to do. Might as well be honest and say you cheated instead of lying for weeks, months, and eventaully years before confessing it on your death bed 40 years later.

Freeze
09-20-2007, 06:14 PM
End of the story : (http://sports.yahoo.com/sc/news;_ylt=AnuX2trzTiF2GSBlOJ90Xk1.grcF?slug=ap-landisdecision&prov=ap&type=lgns)

Arbitrators find Landis guilty of doping, rule he must forfeit 2006 Tour title

By EDDIE PELLS, AP National Writer
September 20, 2007

PARIS (AP) -- Floyd Landis lost his expensive and explosive doping case Thursday when arbitrators upheld the results of a test that showed the 2006 Tour de France champion used synthetic testosterone to fuel his spectacular comeback victory.

The decision means Landis, who repeatedly has denied using performance-enhancing drugs, must forfeit his Tour de France title and is subject to a two-year ban, retroactive to Jan. 30, 2007.

The ruling, handed down nearly four months after a bizarre and bitterly fought hearing, leaves the American with one final way to possibly salvage his title -- an appeal to the Court of Arbitration for Sport.

If Landis doesn't appeal, he'll be the first person in the 105-year history of the race to lose the title because of a doping offense.

According to documents obtained by AP, the vote was 2-1 to uphold the results, with lead arbitrator Patrice Brunet and Richard McLaren in the majority and Christopher Campbell dissenting.


"Today's ruling is a victory for all clean athletes and everyone who values fair and honest competition," U.S. Anti-Doping Agency CEO Travis Tygart said.

It's a devastating loss for Landis, who steadfastly has insisted that cheating went against everything he was about and said he was merely a pawn in the anti-doping system's all-consuming effort to find cheaters and keep money flowing to its labs and agencies.

Landis didn't hide from the scrutiny -- invited it, in fact -- and now has been found guilty by the closest thing to a fair trial any accused athlete will get. This comes after the initial positive test, then a guilty finding by a USADA panel, then the long leadup to the arbitration hearing, and now finally, this decision.

Landis has a month to file his appeal. He is still weighing his legal options, according to a statement released by his legal team.

"This ruling is a blow to athletes and cyclists everywhere" Landis said. "For the Panel to find in favor of USADA when, with respect to so many issues, USADA did not manage to prove even the most basic parts of their case shows that this system is fundamentally flawed. I am innocent, and we proved I am innocent."

Despite the result, it's hard to see this as a total victory for USADA, which prosecuted the case. This was a costly affair for the agency, and it exposed flaws in the system.

In its 84-page decision, the majority found the initial screening test to measure Landis' testosterone levels -- the testosterone-to-epitestosterone test -- was not done according to World Anti-Doping Agency rules.

But the more precise and expensive carbon-isotope ratio analysis (IRMS), performed after a positive T-E test is recorded, was accurate, the arbitrators said, meaning "an anti-doping rule violation is established."

"As has been held in several cases, even where the T-E ratio has been held to be unreliable ... the IRMS analysis may still be applied," the majority wrote. "It has also been held that the IRMS analysis may stand alone as the basis" of a positive test for steroids.

The decision comes more than a year after Landis' stunning comeback in Stage 17 of the 2006 Tour, one that many people said couldn't be done without some kind of outside help.

"It's not a great surprise considering how events have evolved," Pat McQuaid, leader of cycling's world governing body, told the AP by telephone. "He got a highly qualified legal team who tried to baffle everybody with science and public relations. And in the end the facts stood up."

McQuaid said Spanish rider Oscar Pereiro, who finished second to Landis in the 2006 Tour, would be declared the Tour de France winner, as called for by UCI rules.

"You never want to win a competition like that," Pereiro said. "But after a year and a half of all of this I'm just glad it's over."

Landis insisted on a public hearing not only to prove his innocence, but to shine a spotlight on USADA and the rules it enforces and also establish a pattern of incompetence at the French lab where his urine was tested.

Although the panel rejected Landis' argument of a "conspiracy" at the Chatenay-Malabry lab, it did find areas of concern. They dealt with chain of command in controlling the urine sample, the way the tests were run on the machine, the way the machine was prepared and the "forensic corrections" done on the lab paperwork.

"... the Panel finds that the practises of the Lab in training its employees appears to lack the vigor the Panel would expect in the circumstances given the enormous consequences to athletes" of an adverse analytical finding, the decision said.

The majority repeatedly wrote that any mistakes made at the lab were not enough to dismiss the positive test, but also sent a warning.

"If such practises continue, it may well be that in the future, an error like this could result in the dismissal" of a positive finding by the lab.

In Campbell's opinion, Landis' case should have been one of those cases.

"The documents supplied by LNDD are so filled with errors that they do not support an Adverse Analytical Finding," Campbell wrote. "Mr. Landis should be found innocent."

And in at least one respect, Landis, who spent an estimated $2 million on his defense, was exonerated because the panel dismissed the T-E test. But in the arbitration process, a procedural flaw in the first test doesn't negate a positive result in follow-up tests.

In his dissent, Campbell latched onto the T-E ratio test, among other things, as proof that the French lab couldn't be trusted. He said the T-E test is much more simple to run than the IRMS test.

"If the LNDD couldn't get the T-E ratio test right, how can a person have any confidence that LNDD got the much more complicated IRMS test correct?" he wrote.

It was confusion like this that led to the system receiving the harsh review Landis was hoping for during his nine-day hearing in May.

But Landis also took his share of abuse, and ultimately, USADA still improved to 35-0 in cases it has brought before arbitration panels since it was founded in 2000.

This was a nasty contest waged on both sides, with USADA attorneys going after Landis' character and taking liberties in evidence discovery that wouldn't be permitted in a regular court of law. Landis accused USADA of using a win-at-all-costs strategy and prosecuting him only to get him to turn on seven-time winner Lance Armstrong, who has long fought doping allegations that have never been proven.

More than the complex, turgid scientific evidence, the May hearing will be remembered for the Greg LeMond brouhaha.

The hearing turned into a soap opera when the former Tour de France winner showed up and told of being sexually abused as a child, confiding that to Landis, then receiving a call from Landis' manager the night before his testimony threatening to disclose LeMond's secret to the world if LeMond showed up.

LeMond not only showed up, he also claimed Landis had admitted to him that he doped. That was the only aspect of the LeMond testimony the panel cared about.

"The panel concludes that the respondent's comment to Mr. LeMond did not amount to an admission of guilt or doping," the majority wrote.