12/21/24
July 27, 2006
Tour de Fake?: Tour de France winner, Floyd Landis, reportedly tested positive for drugs after Stage 17. Yeah, that stage 17.
Oh no.
posted by dusted at 09:35 AM on July 27, 2006
F him.
posted by T$PORT4lawschool at 09:38 AM on July 27, 2006
Oh, boy. If confirmed (by the B sample) this is devastating. Especially suspicious coming after his "magnificent" stage 17 ride.
posted by bullitt_5 at 09:44 AM on July 27, 2006
Let's wait a minute here. All he tested for was "unusually high levels of testosterone/epitestosterone." This can happen quite naturally - I have unusually high levels too, and I don't take anything. We're a long way off from showing that he's done anything illegal. But that won't stop outlets like ESPN from running the headline "Landis Fails Doping Test," which is what it currently says. Show me the evidence of any actual drug, please, before you start throwing around stupid words like "doping." (for what it's worth, I'm pretty sure we will ultimately see some more evidence come out, like some baseline levels, presence of other stuff in the system, etc. I'm just upset with how venemous the headlines are when so far they haven't shown us anything that couldn't have been caused by a good meal, some zinc, and a good night's sleep. I'm just really sick of the media lately.)
posted by Bernreuther at 09:47 AM on July 27, 2006
Well the French apparently finally got their US doper, not the one they really wanted to catch, but it does seem to somehow taint Lance just a little bit (more) in the process
posted by hb74147 at 09:51 AM on July 27, 2006
After Stage 17 I think anybody would've had a high level of testosterone (even the french) because that took balls.
posted by timdawg at 10:08 AM on July 27, 2006
I know that in athletics acceptable testosterone levels have decreased, leading to criticism, and bans being lifted, is this also the case in cycling?
posted by Fence at 10:13 AM on July 27, 2006
I hope this isn't a case of the french trying to get back at the U. S. for winning thier biggest sporting event for 8 stright years. However if Landis turns out to be a doper then he should be disqualified. Proformance enhancment has becpme so rampent in sports these days its hard to look at any "outstanding" performance without wondering in the back of your mind if the athelete is cheating.
posted by Cubfan276 at 10:22 AM on July 27, 2006
because that took balls No slight to Lance intended, I'm sure.
posted by Ufez Jones at 10:24 AM on July 27, 2006
“Right now, we have to let the process proceed and we can’t comment on it.” Shame we don't have a similar rule at SpoFi. Cubfan276, the tests are done by the UCI (you might have noticed that if you'd read the link), not "the french", so enough with the paranoid nonsense. Until the second test confirms (or fails to) the result of the first and we then find out how high his levels were (i.e., was it "a good meal, some zinc, and a good night's sleep", or was he off the scale) there's not much to say other than "please, don't let that be true." Maybe. Or maybe (if it is true) it could be the best thing for the long term future of a sport in dire trouble. I suspect, if he is convicted and stripped of the title, the governing bodies might finally get their fingers out and set about making some sweeping changes - like maybe adding a ball to be passed around during each stage and some monster trucks to dodge to keep mattdfi45 happy.
posted by JJ at 10:58 AM on July 27, 2006
(maatdif45, it's on the front page of the NY Times. So evidently, you're wrong. Also, discussions about what is and isn't a sport aren't encouraged here.) Cycling really needs to get their doping situation in order. The longer the ambiguities continue, the longer people will be able to tut-tut the whole sport away as if it were weightlifting or something. As far as Landis is concerned, well, there's no way he could have done what he did without a high level of testosterone. I'm holding out a faint hope that his levels were naturally heightened somehow. Good meal, zinc, & good night's sleep? I hope.
posted by chicobangs at 11:05 AM on July 27, 2006
Wow, this is a crappy new chapter in the Floyd Landis story. I hope it turns out to be false but I'm not holding my breath.
posted by fenriq at 11:10 AM on July 27, 2006
[derail] Does that meal/zinc/sleep thing really work? I'm trying to knock eight swimming events off the Olympic bid on Saturday and can use all the help I can get. [/derail]
posted by JJ at 11:17 AM on July 27, 2006
I like how honest his Mom is about the temptation for cyclers to use performance enhancers. We victimize these people but sometimes we don't step into their shoes and consider how difficult these decisions really are.
posted by DudeDykstra at 11:17 AM on July 27, 2006
Damn, damn, damn. It seemed too good to be true.
posted by vito90 at 11:21 AM on July 27, 2006
Well - there you have it. The mighty brains on this board have finally nailed it - the French made Landis dope to get back at Armstrong. I know, I know, it sounds completely stupid and the kind of thought that would give a six-year old pause, but.... But.... But I can't think of a way to finish this sentence.
posted by WeedyMcSmokey at 11:26 AM on July 27, 2006
This can happen quite naturally - I have unusually high levels too, and I don't take anything. We're a long way off from showing that he's done anything illegal. When they say "high levels" in terms of dope testing, they mean "beyond the realm of naturally occuring", not "I've eaten a lot of zinc today."
posted by grum@work at 11:28 AM on July 27, 2006
Why bother ever having the race again? It seems it can't be made clean, at least not to the level where most people will believe the results. Bye bye to the Tour.
posted by commander cody at 11:35 AM on July 27, 2006
Asked about his constant calls for extra water during Thursday's stage, run in searing conditions, he said, "It was very hot. Maybe that was the explanation or maybe it was the beer I had last night." "Either that or the 'Roids had given me a serious case of the drymouth, like Weedy on a Friday night in Amsterdam." He was like a motor bike. He was unbelievable," Ummm, is that unbelieveable like 73 Home Runs unbelieveable?? Or like "Wow, you need Andro to do that..." For him to test positive at exactly the stage where he stopped looking like a loser and you started wondering why he hadn't been leading the thing all along... I was suspicious even before this, but didn't want to be called French.
posted by LostInDaJungle at 11:58 AM on July 27, 2006
I'm with cody. At some point, if everyone assumes by default that the winner is doping, don't you just give up and let people dope, or go home?
posted by tieguy at 12:01 PM on July 27, 2006
And now.... "Released in French newspapers today, American Tour de France winner, Floyd Landis, accused of performance enhancing drug usage." Sarcasm, but wouldn't be surprised. posted by Stealth_72 at 7:15 AM CDT on July 24 Just call me Nostradamus :)
posted by Stealth_72 at 12:14 PM on July 27, 2006
Here's an informed meathead's perspective on zinc, magnesium, and testosterone. I learn something new every day... thanks Floyd!
posted by dusted at 12:19 PM on July 27, 2006
I haven't read any of Nostradamus' sarcastic predictions. Is there an anthology?
posted by Mr Bismarck at 12:21 PM on July 27, 2006
Drugs don't go gently into that not-so-good Mennonite
posted by ajaffe at 12:34 PM on July 27, 2006
I wanted to believe. I really did. But in the end pro cycling's as dirty now as it has been for 40+ years. Charly Gaul doped, Eddy doped, Hinault, Big Mig, they're all dopers. Pro cycling is at a crossroads now. It can either 'fess up to being what it is and truly attempt to clean up or continue to microdose and mask as more and more riders are unlucky and get caught. I'm just not sure how many more times fans can suspend their disbelief...
posted by JohnSFO at 12:42 PM on July 27, 2006
When they say "high levels" in terms of dope testing, they mean "beyond the realm of naturally occuring", not "I've eaten a lot of zinc today." Do you have a source for that? Fence's comment above suggests it's not always so clear. And I think Bern has mentioned something similar in previous threads.
posted by yerfatma at 12:48 PM on July 27, 2006
Drugs don't go gently into that not-so-good Mennonite ahahaha - good one, ajaffe.
posted by worldcup2002 at 12:48 PM on July 27, 2006
Tour de fake. Nice job with the title bperk. How flippin embarassing. I know some people will be like (just like with other fakes), 'oh lets wait and see' or 'innocent' bla bla and feed some line of misquoted legal rules or come up with an excuse for the dude, but really he just doped up. There's no mystery.
posted by T$PORT4lawschool at 12:48 PM on July 27, 2006
I'm just glad that we don't hear anything about dope in football, basketball, baseball, etc. Maybe these cyclists should look up to these clean living fellas.
posted by joromu at 12:48 PM on July 27, 2006
Interesting article: German doctor Kurt Moosburger, who has looked after Jörg Jaksche (among others) for the past two years, has told dpa that he believes that performance enhancing drugs are "indispensable" for high level cycling In a frank interview, Moosburger pointed to the average speeds of modern professional races, especially hard tours. "The average in last year's Tour was 41 kilometres per hour - that is incredible. 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." Dr Moosburger went onto explain that, "The supply of oxygen to the blood decides what the body is capable of in terms of fat- and carbohydrate metabolism. This capacity is mostly genetically determined.The muscles of athletes who are able to reach the top level of sport can carry about 60 millilitres per kilo per minute in an untrained condition. That of an average person is only about 40 millilitres per kilo. In order to be able to keep up with the world's best, it must be 85 to 90 millilitres. EPO helps oxygen carrying capacity, and has long been the performance enhancing drug of choice in endurance sports. "It enables you to hold the haematocrit of the blood in the upper level of what's allowed for the whole season. Before the EPO test, for example, athletes injected 4000 units three times per week. Now they inject a small dose almost daily." Finally, in the opinion of Dr Moosburger, blood doping via transfusion would give an athlete a five percent boost for two to three weeks. "And therefore can last for a grand tour." Perhaps Floyd just forgot to follow the directions... Source: http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?id=news/2006/jul06/jul07news3
posted by JohnSFO at 12:59 PM on July 27, 2006
I wonder if a Frenchman had won we would be hearing this. I just say let the dopes dope and see which doped dope is the fastest. It wouldn't be cheating if everybody was allowed to do it. Just like in bodybuilding, everybody does it, wants to do it, accepts it, its part of the sport, life goes on and Mr. Universe just keeps getting freakishly bigger.
posted by Atheist at 01:03 PM on July 27, 2006
Thanks John. Very eeenteresting.
posted by WeedyMcSmokey at 01:05 PM on July 27, 2006
I wonder if a Frenchman had won we would be hearing this. Unless you've found a rule that exempts French stage winners from pissing in the cup, that's a silly question to ask. (Particularly remembering the Festina affair and the role of Virenque, darling of the French press.)
posted by etagloh at 01:20 PM on July 27, 2006
From the Yahoo story: Arlene Landis, his mother, said Thursday that she wouldn't blame her son if he was taking medication to treat the pain in his injured hip, but "if it's something worse than that, then he doesn't deserve to win." "I didn't talk to him since that hit the fan, but I'm keeping things even keel until I know what the facts are," she told The Associated Press in a phone interview from her home in Farmersville, Pennsylvania. "I know that this is a temptation to every rider but I'm not going to jump to conclusions ... It disappoints me." Um, I could be wrong, but it sounds like even his own Mom is being pretty careful not to take sides here.
posted by hb74147 at 01:25 PM on July 27, 2006
Mmm.. moose burgers..
posted by blarp at 01:32 PM on July 27, 2006
Um, I could be wrong, but it sounds like even his own Mom is being pretty careful not to take sides here. I wouldn't put much stock in what his family members and childhood "friends" say. They've all made very clear that they disapprove of his lifestyle and choices. To them, not being a strict Mennonite means you're going straight to hell regardless. A little drugs would just be one more log on the hellfire pyre.
posted by dusted at 01:38 PM on July 27, 2006
I like Pereiro's attitude: “Should I win the Tour now it would feel like an academic victory ... The way to celebrate a win is in Paris, otherwise it’s just a bureaucratic win.” Maybe he's just posturing, but it's refreshing change from hearing/reading about coaches and managers writing formal protests to league officials whenever they feel they've been robbed of a victory.
posted by forrestv at 01:58 PM on July 27, 2006
Should Periero take the yellow, it'll have about as much significance as when Heras was caught doping in last year's Vuelta and Menchov became the "winner". What's interesting is that every time this happens there is complete silence from other riders. While tradition and unwritten rules are an integral part of pro cycling, that may not always be such a good thing.
posted by JohnSFO at 02:08 PM on July 27, 2006
Typical: when Landis won stage 17, ESPN announced it in 10 point type on the side of their front page, with the latest Pat Tillman and Barry Bonds controversies in huge headlines. Now Landis makes the cover. ESPN sucks donkey balls.
posted by dusted at 02:26 PM on July 27, 2006
ESPN sucks donkey balls agreed.
posted by garfield at 02:39 PM on July 27, 2006
Floyd is scheduled to be on The Tonight Show on Friday.
posted by catfish at 02:56 PM on July 27, 2006
I would like to see a better explanation of the testing procedures. No, not that they piss in a cup and it gets tested. But, how long does it take to do the test? If he is guilty, then it's a shame that it was not discovered immediately so that somebody else could celebrate the victory. And, also, how long does the stuff stay in your system (or for testosterone, how long do levels stay elevated relating to performance enhancement substances). If he tested negative on all other tests (assuming he was tested daily, but I don't know that either), but tested positive on that one day's test, would that be normal?
posted by graymatters at 03:05 PM on July 27, 2006
Bernreuther is right on
posted by caselaw at 03:06 PM on July 27, 2006
When they say "high levels" in terms of dope testing, they mean "beyond the realm of naturally occuring", not "I've eaten a lot of zinc today." Do you have a source for that? Good point. I was under the assumption that the standards in drug testing for testosterone was the same for blood doping/EPO, where there are recognized natural high levels, but testing "positive" is beyond that. However, this article suggests the same thing as did Bernreuther. My apologies.
posted by grum@work at 03:56 PM on July 27, 2006
SI interviews Floyd: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2006/writers/austin_murphy/07/27/landis.react/index.html
posted by JohnSFO at 04:03 PM on July 27, 2006
Graymatters, exactly. I want to know what they do to test it. How often do they do it? Was he normal on stages 16 and 18? I want to know what kind of natural variations in test levels can occur from one day to the next (I know a lot about this stuff in general, and know that a good hard night of drinking can decrease your levels, but am not sure what constitutes a normal fluctuation). I know that if he was on the good stuff, injecting test, his levels would stay elevated for a good while. Generally steroid users only have to inject the test once every several days, depending on which kind they're using. Thanks, Caselaw. (by the way, anyone know why I can't reply in Firefox 1.5 in Mac 10.3.9? I had to open Safari to post this. FF says I'm not logged in, even though I am.)
posted by Bernreuther at 04:07 PM on July 27, 2006
ESPN has a mildly useful doping Q&A with a doctor from WADA. Relevant to the discussion here:
Q: Under World Anti-Doping Agency regulations, what is an acceptable testosterone-to-epitestosterone ratio? A: It used to be 6-to-1. It's now 4-to-1. Most people are 1-to-1 or 2-to-1. Q: Does a test positive for high levels of testosterone equate to a failed test? A: The question for any given individual is, what does an abnormal or elevated ratio mean? Some people are born with [ratios] that are normally 4-to-1, or maybe 8-to-1. If they are consistently that way, week after week, there are ways to evaluate that. If the elevation exists and occurs naturally in that athlete, we can figure that out. This particular athlete -- Landis, in this case -- I'm sure has had multiple drug tests and a history of his testosterone to epitestosterone ratios, and if there's a sudden aberration, it sends up a red flag.
posted by tieguy at 04:31 PM on July 27, 2006
Cycling analyst on PTI said the ratio in Landis was at 11-1 & that his epitestosterone was very low while testosterone level was normal. He believes Floyd is clean.
posted by catfish at 04:56 PM on July 27, 2006
forrestb: I like Pereiro's attitude Pereiro was riding for Phonak last year. That makes Andreas Klöden the virtual winner.
posted by afx237vi at 05:25 PM on July 27, 2006
After the win Armstrong was claiming credit for the tutelage he gave Floyd. At the time I thought it was incredibly arrogant, now I realise he was just coming clean!
posted by Fat Buddha at 05:28 PM on July 27, 2006
I don't know whether Landis doped or not but I find it interesting that a cyclist who has been in the sport for something like 8 years has not tested positive until after he has won the tour. I also find it interesting that the sample just happened to have been taken on the day of his great performance. It just seems a bit too scripted for me.
posted by Familyman at 06:15 PM on July 27, 2006
I also find it interesting that the sample just happened to have been taken on the day of his great performance The winner and second place of every Stage are automatically tested. Others are tested randomly.
posted by JohnSFO at 06:22 PM on July 27, 2006
From VeloNews: Landis denies doping.
posted by lil_brown_bat at 06:44 PM on July 27, 2006
The winner and second place of every Stage are automatically tested. Others are tested randomly. Worth noting in this context that he'd never won a stage before.
posted by tieguy at 06:53 PM on July 27, 2006
According to the expert on ESPN Landis' testosterone levels were actully below normal. Its the ratio thats in question. that very well could have been caused buy the cortison shots he was taking for his hip. I, for one am willing to give him the benifit of the dout until someone proves he was injecting.
posted by Cubfan276 at 06:56 PM on July 27, 2006
The winner and second place of every Stage are automatically tested. Others are tested randomly. Worth noting in this context that he'd never won a stage before. True but he did finish second in the first long time trial so he should have been tested on stage 7.
posted by heavy-d at 07:31 PM on July 27, 2006
by the way, anyone know why I can't reply in Firefox 1.5 in Mac 10.3.9? I had to open Safari to post this. FF says I'm not logged in, even though I am. Because 10.3 isn't cool anymore. Any chance you're blocking cookies? I'm on 10.4 with Firefox with no problems. Also: in your face grum
posted by yerfatma at 07:32 PM on July 27, 2006
Hi everybody! Sorry I'm late ... I think that tieguy's comment above should be mandatory reading. This is not yet a sanction for doping; it is simply an adverse analytical finding. I also did some analysis that suggests that the change from 6/1 to 4/1 T/E ratio caused a significant increase in false positives. Of ourse if Landis was really 11/1 then that analysis is irrelevant. Finally, grum: I was under the assumption that the standards in drug testing for testosterone was the same for blood doping/EPO, where there are recognized natural high levels, but testing "positive" is beyond that. That is correct, as tieguy's quote lays out. However, I would point out that some scientists question whether the urine test for EPO also has a false positive problem.
posted by Amateur at 08:48 PM on July 27, 2006
And speaking of required reading, go and read the Boulder Report on this news, and the comments.
posted by Amateur at 08:59 PM on July 27, 2006
I don't want to have minored in Chem to enjoy sporting events any longer. I mean I'm starting to cheer on my Detriot Tigers, but still half expect that, after I get my hopes up and re-grow my sports "faith cherry", I'll suddenly find out they're all sharing the same needle or eating from the same bag of pills and I'll be right back to getting it busted again. It's gotten to the point where you don't DARE feel good about any sporting accomplishments anymore.
posted by commander cody at 11:40 PM on July 27, 2006
I don't believe that he cheated. From what I have heard he has good character and a great family. There are many ways that he could have high testosterine without doping. For example, it can come from prescribed medication. He did not cheat! I'm out.
posted by sportsg at 12:18 AM on July 28, 2006
Grum, I Don't know if you're still following, but I'm curious about your assertion earlier, and I cant find anything on it. Whats the overage or whatever... I tried to decipher some of the other comments, but I still can't really figure out how much he would have had to be over to get flagged, and whats normal, etc...
posted by everett at 12:59 AM on July 28, 2006
everett, I'll tackle it. There is a wide variation of "normal" testosterone levels in humans, so that level is not used as the basis of the test. The testosterone test is positive if the ratio of testosterone to epitestosterone (T/E) is greater than 4:1. The average for the human population, from what I can gather, is 1:1. I read in one place that 4:1 is "two standard deviations" above the mean, a statement that would imply a false positive rate in the general population of about 2.5%. A high T/E ratio is not enough to be found guilty of a doping offense, by itself. Some further investigation is undertaken to find out if the testosterone is exogenous (of external origin) or not. It is not clear to me that such an investigation has been done in Landis' case. Landis' ratio of 11/1, if that's confirmed, is therefore extremely high. However, I have seen it reported in several places that his testosterone level was in fact normal or below normal, which would support his assertion that he did not take any. If true it means that Landis has a very good chance of being effectively found not guilty of using exogenous testosterone.
posted by Amateur at 05:49 AM on July 28, 2006
Holy innocent until proven guilty, Batman. I have never seen such a rush to judgment that a guy is guilty based on so little data. I think even OJ got the benefit of the doubt for a few weeks. On my way home yesterday I was listening to the Chairman of some anti-doping commission (I don't remember the name, else I'd look it up), and he was saying things like "this is terrible for the sport", and "we just haven't done enough to clean up our act". If the guy doped, and they can prove it incontrovertibly, then fine. But the day of, and this dickhead is going off about what a tragedy it is? Doesn't anyone have a sense of even-handedness anymore, or even any instinct at all to wait to get more data before shooting off their mouths and making Landis don the scarlet "D"? Oh, the humanity!
posted by psmealey at 08:22 AM on July 28, 2006
Holy innocent until proven guilty, Batman. I have never seen such a rush to judgment that a guy is guilty based on so little data. You obviously don't remember 2001 and Bonds' assault on the baseball record book. Sure, stuff came out (way) later, but during his run people were throwing accusations around without even a positive drug test or eyewitness testimony.
posted by grum@work at 08:53 AM on July 28, 2006
The NY Post is already presuming Landis' guilt. The back page has a picture of him smiling with a headline that reads "What a dope" Not that the post is the most reputiable source of news (Fucking Rupert Murdoch owns that rag) but a suprising number of people think that the post is a real paper.
posted by HATER 187 at 10:08 AM on July 28, 2006
thanks amateur
posted by everett at 10:20 AM on July 28, 2006
Saw his Press conference this AM. I dont think he did anyting wrong! We need to wait for the whole story.
posted by daddisamm at 12:06 PM on July 28, 2006
Holy innocent until proven guilty, Batman. I have never seen such a rush to judgment that a guy is guilty based on so little data. I think even OJ got the benefit of the doubt for a few weeks. As far as the legal system is concerned, he still has the benefit of the doubt: he's walking around free. If you're talking about the so-called court of public opinion, are you honestly saying that everybody said, "Oh, heh, well, I'll believe he's guilty when they prove it"? If the guy doped, and they can prove it incontrovertibly, then fine. But the day of, and this dickhead is going off about what a tragedy it is? Doesn't anyone have a sense of even-handedness anymore, or even any instinct at all to wait to get more data before shooting off their mouths and making Landis don the scarlet "D"? Think of it this way: if there is no doping, the anti-doping organizations have no raison d'etre. They have no justification for their existence. That is going to be the angle you hear in everything that comes out of their representatives' mouths: that this is a rampant, uncontrollable problem that can only be checked by supporting their regime and their administration (which don't come cheap) and letting them have free rein, with zero accountability. What is required is for more sports fans to take such remarks with a big grain of salt, to look at the motive and "follow the money", so to speak. (IOW, yeah, these guys are pretty much professional dickheads.)
posted by lil_brown_bat at 02:52 PM on July 28, 2006
That is going to be the angle you hear in everything that comes out of their representatives' mouths: that this is a rampant, uncontrollable problem that can only be checked by supporting their regime and their administration (which don't come cheap) and letting them have free rein, with zero accountability. Good lord, I think I agree with something lbb wrote.
posted by graymatters at 03:27 PM on July 28, 2006
On my way home yesterday I was listening to the Chairman of some anti-doping commission (I don't remember the name, else I'd look it up), and he was saying things like "this is terrible for the sport", and "we just haven't done enough to clean up our act". Was it Dick Pound, head of the World Anti-Doping Agency? I don't see how he has kept his job after the Armstrong EPO debacle. He has a thankless job, but he seems particularly ill-fitted to it. He needs to keep his mouth shut until all test results are confirmed and conclusive.
posted by dusted at 03:29 PM on July 28, 2006
Of course he has naturally high testosterone levels. We Americans are just extra manly. Yearghhhh!!!
posted by Adam at 03:42 PM on July 28, 2006
That is going to be the angle you hear in everything that comes out of their representatives' mouths: that this is a rampant, uncontrollable problem that can only be checked by supporting their regime and their administration (which don't come cheap) and letting them have free rein, with zero accountability. My God! That is the best description of the Bush adminstration's stand on terrorism I've ever heard!
posted by commander cody at 06:55 PM on July 28, 2006
Damn, commander, you'll get the neocons in here yet, right when they were isolated in the God at the Ballpark, Hate the Sinner, Hate the Sin discussion. Seriously, ten bucks says the two I'm thinking about are on you like Cheney on a free-range lawyer soon enough.
posted by The_Black_Hand at 09:30 PM on July 28, 2006
LOL! To quote their new messiah "Bring 'em on!" Besides I think they're too busy in the other thread. It's better to have them all gathered in one place so you can keep an eye on them. Sneaky little SOB's that they are. ;-)
posted by commander cody at 11:13 PM on July 28, 2006
If you're talking about the so-called court of public opinion, are you honestly saying that everybody said, "Oh, heh, well, I'll believe he's guilty when they prove it"? No, not everybody. Just the loudest voices in the sports media. I have heard some pretty even-handed reporting on NPR (which does sports pretty well, when it tries), but pretty much everything else I have read or heard has been hysterical, everyone grab your pitchforks 'n' torches screeds. I think most sports fans are a little more sensible than that, I was just appalled by the shamelessness of it all.
posted by psmealey at 06:46 AM on July 29, 2006
Just found this blog that's working on covering all of this and digging into the ins and outs of test efficacy, alcohol effects, who's doing the testing, etc.
posted by ursus_comiter at 09:36 AM on July 29, 2006
Did anyone read this yet? Landis and his attorney claim that the testosterone imbalance was a natural occurance. Anyone believe them?
posted by redsoxrgay at 12:53 PM on July 29, 2006
F--K THE FRENCH THEY'RE JUST BAD LOOSERS
posted by buzzardfur at 01:58 PM on July 29, 2006
What it needs is the Syrians to tell the cyclists to cut that shit out.
posted by Fat Buddha at 02:19 PM on July 29, 2006
I said: If you're talking about the so-called court of public opinion, are you honestly saying that everybody said, "Oh, heh, well, I'll believe he's guilty when they prove it"? ...and psmealy replied: No, not everybody. Just the loudest voices in the sports media. You're talking about comments made by the loudest voices in sports media about the OJ Simpson case? Help me out with this one.
posted by lil_brown_bat at 10:16 AM on July 30, 2006
Sorry, l_b_b, it probably wasn't the best analogy to make, you're right. My main point wasn't so much shock as it was disappointment that so much of the sports press instantly jumped to the conclusion that Landis doped, before a second round of tests could be run to confirm it, and there still is the possibility that his ratio was natural phenomenon, as doubtful as that may seem. The effect of this, if he is as innocent as a newborn baby, is that his win will still be tainted. That's the part that's not fair.
posted by psmealey at 01:34 PM on July 30, 2006
I see the New York Times are reporting that the testosterone is from an external, synthetic source.
posted by Fence at 03:42 AM on August 01, 2006
*cry*
posted by lil_brown_bat at 09:04 AM on August 01, 2006
Yes, if this is confirmed, Landis is cooked.
posted by Amateur at 08:06 PM on August 01, 2006
Uh-oh, here we go.