Re: Landis' defence
Simon Brooke
('sben...@YOUAREALLNETDENIZENSwiderworld.co.uk') wrote:
> Simon Brooke wrote:
>
>> Also today, charges against Ivan Basso have finally been dropped for
>> lack of evidence. The Italian Olympic Committee say they may reopen
>> the case if new evidence comes to light, and the UCI may appeal the
>> case to the Court of Arbitration in Sport, but Ivan expects to race
>> on Saturday.
>
> This is all absolutely amazing news. Landis, Ullrich and Basso -- all
> innocent! Great for them, and great for the sport!
I have a nasty suspicion that what this really boils down to is a turf-war
between the UCI/ProTour and the owners of the three big Grand Tours, at
the expense of the cyclists. The UCI was happy to pre-emptively leak and
talk up the evidence - as it turns out, wholly inconclusive - against the
winners and major stars of the Giro and the Tour de France and it seems to
me the motivation may have been to damage the pre-eminence of the Grand
Tours, and to increase the influence of the UCI.
It seems to me that the cyclists whose reputations have been traduced have
a real complaint against the UCI, one which I would expect Landis, at
least, to turn into legal action. The UCI has committed two major sins:
they've played dirty, and they've lost. I would not like to be in Pat
McQuaid's shoes this morning.
Personally, I shall be bouncing up and down on the sofa on Saturday
afternoon, yelling 'Basso! Basso! Basso!' with the best of them.
--
si...@jasmine.org.uk (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/
Due to financial constraints, the light at the end of the tunnel
has been switched off.
dkahn400
> It seems to me that the cyclists whose reputations have been traduced have
> a real complaint against the UCI, one which I would expect Landis, at
> least, to turn into legal action.
Apart from his loss of earnings and the damage to his reputation so far
Landis faces the problem that his name being cleared, which now seems a
certainty, is likely to be perceived by the average person as some kind
of lucky escape. It therefore seems to me that legal action from him is
almost inevitable as the only way he can really establish his innocence
in the minds of the public.
--
Dave...
David Martin
Especially as if the USADA clear him then they will perhaps be seen as
weak or 'protecting one of the boys'.
What a mess.. The only people to come out of this with any credit are..
.. answers on the back of a postage stamp please.
..d
Ewoud Dronkert
> his name being cleared, which now seems a certainty
Hah!
--
E. Dronkert
Alexander Lackner
----- Original Message -----
From: "Simon Brooke" <si...@jasmine.org.uk>
Newsgroups: rec.bicycles.racing,uk.rec.cycling
Sent: Friday, October 13, 2006 11:23 AM
Subject: Re: Landis' defence
> Personally, I shall be bouncing up and down on the sofa on Saturday
> afternoon, yelling 'Basso! Basso! Basso!' with the best of them.
Knock yourself out, but he's not starting. Riis seems reluctant to offer him
a platform now that they appear to be parting ways.
Alexander
Rob Morley
David Martin <martin...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
<snip>
> What a mess.. The only people to come out of this with any credit are..
>
Dan Gregory
> I have a nasty suspicion that what this really boils down to is a turf-war
> between the UCI/ProTour and the owners of the three big Grand Tours, at
> the expense of the cyclists. The UCI was happy to pre-emptively leak and
> talk up the evidence - as it turns out, wholly inconclusive - against the
> winners and major stars of the Giro and the Tour de France and it seems to
> me the motivation may have been to damage the pre-eminence of the Grand
> Tours, and to increase the influence of the UCI.
At last something that makes sense!
Although having seen Landis close up on that day I am convinced he was
on a charge!
RonSonic
Probably more doped than the riders.
Ron
RonSonic
Almost every bike race I have ever been a part of has had the final placings
decided by a gut check of some sort. It's probably more a factor among the
barely competent mountain bikers and cross racers that I ride among, but it
applies at every level. It ain't just dope. It ain't just guy's at the pro tour
level either.
But, when it is a rider of that class and caliber it is truly awesome to see.
Floyd won and deserved it.
Ron
dkahn400
> Although having seen Landis close up on that day I am convinced he was
> on a charge!
He was, but it's not now possible to know conclusively whether the
source of that charge was chemical or psychological. His ride that day
was either one of the great solo efforts of cycling history, somewhat
aided by confusion in the rival teams, or it was simple cheating.
Personally I'm now happy to give Landis the benefit of the doubt, but
thanks to the machinations of the French so-called laboratory we'll
never really know. If he was cheating there is certainly no meaningful
evidence of it as far as we now know.
In future I think A and B samples should be processed in separate
laboratories, preferably on separate continents.
--
Dave...
tgh
dkahn400 wrote:
> Dan Gregory wrote:
>
snip
>
> In future I think A and B samples should be processed in separate
> laboratories, preferably on separate continents.
>
> --
> Dave...
I have wondered why this isn't part of the protocol already.
tgh.
David Martin
It costs money. These tests are not cheap to perform once the
appropriate infrastructure costs are taken into account.
With the admin, calibration, audit trail, refrigerated transport and
storage, it adds up to a significant cost per sample. It is cheaper to
test the whole load in one batch (due to calibration/setup costs) than
it is to do an overnight analysis (which is perfectly possible, just
expensive.)
The incremental cost per sample is not much, it is the setup and
infrastructure costs that really make the difference.
..d
Carl Sundquist
"David Martin" <martin...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
news:1160756240.3...@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
What is the cost compared to the inevitiable attorney's fees? If nothing
else, the infrastucture costs could be borne by the defendant/accused if
they opt to have a second lab test the B sample.
As I mentioned before, there is nothing keeping the athlete from keeping
part of his sample for his own use. It wouldn't be admissible as evidence,
but could be used by the athlete as a reference to be tested on their own,
should the A sample come back positive.
dbrower
They don't test many B samples. The incremental expense would be
trivial.
-dB
mdp
<1160736545.1...@f16g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>
,
"David Martin" <martin...@blueyonder.co.uk>
wrote:
I.
Mike Jacoubowsky
> part of his sample for his own use. It wouldn't be admissible as evidence,
> but could be used by the athlete as a reference to be tested on their own,
> should the A sample come back positive.
Curious as to how large a sample is required for testing. What happens when
an athlete can't produce enough? Or does it require so little that it's not
an issue?
--Mike Jacoubowsky
Chain Reaction Bicycles
www.ChainReaction.com
Redwood City & Los Altos, CA USA
"Carl Sundquist" <car...@cox.net> wrote in message
news:cfPXg.18040$vC3.4598@dukeread02...
Carl Sundquist
"Mike Jacoubowsky" <Mi...@ChainReaction.com> wrote in message
news:eSVXg.10124$TV3...@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com...
>> As I mentioned before, there is nothing keeping the athlete from keeping
>> part of his sample for his own use. It wouldn't be admissible as
>> evidence, but could be used by the athlete as a reference to be tested on
>> their own, should the A sample come back positive.
>
> Curious as to how large a sample is required for testing. What happens
> when an athlete can't produce enough? Or does it require so little that
> it's not an issue?
>
Although ISTR it was only about 100-150 ml, in cases of dehydration at the
end of a long, hot race it could potentially be hours before you had enough
urine to produce a sample. Drug control provides water, juices, and sodas in
sealed containers for those who need additional fluids. I don't recall
having a situation where I wasn't able to provide the required amount on my
first attempt, but I would imagine that if you were only able to pee about
100 ml, you have to start from scratch on your next attempt due to chain of
custody issues on an unsealed container. They measure specific gravity of
the urine as well.
Frank Drackman
Chris Horner talks about this in one of his online diary entries. He had to
wait for fast Freddie who was called for a random. I think he said that
they waited at least 90 minutes.
Carl Sundquist
> Although ISTR it was only about 100-150 ml,
That amount is split into the two (A&B) samples
dbrower
Carl Sundquist wrote:
> > Although ISTR it was only about 100-150 ml,
>
> That amount is split into the two (A&B) samples
As shown in
http://ia331328.us.archive.org/3/items/Floyd_Landis_2006_Doping_Case_Documents4/pdf2eng.pdf
The amount they had from Landis in the A sample was 65ml.
For riders X and Y, they had 95 and 85 ml.
-dB
Tony Raven
>
> Although ISTR it was only about 100-150 ml
>
Ah, so not the three point eight water bottles full shown on Slide 14
then ;-)
http://ia331316.us.archive.org/2/items/Floyd_Landis_2006_Case_Documents7/14_Landis_Baker_Slides.pdf
--
Tony
"Anyone who conducts an argument by appealing to authority is not using
his intelligence; he is just using his memory."
- Leonardo da Vinci