Landis admits doping, points finger at LA - Please read Mod Warning post 1

Lumen

el tonto wrote: »

Interesting:

Did you paste the wrong link? I can't see that text on that page.

petethedrummer

Its in Junior's link above.

zzzzzzzz

el tonto wrote: »

Interesting:

I think it's supposed to be this link:
http://sports.espn.go.com/oly/cycling/columns/story?columnist=ford_bonnie_d&id=5215959

bbosco

davyjose wrote: »

I also have a real fcuking problem with journalists who act like cycling is the most important fcuking sport in the world, when it comes to a "scoop", but I daresay when you flick through the Guardian, or The Sunday Times, or The Independant to see who's leading the Giro de Italia ..... forget about it.

Afterall, that's not what's important about cycling, what's important is what the judgemental, reactionary, clueless hacks tell us to think. The irony is, cycling only matters when they want it to.

I'm a huge fan of professional cycling, and the difference between myself and someone like Walsh, or humphries, is that it hurts me to realise how infected this sport has become. It's not a joyous occasion to scream "I told you so!" And make my name (and $$$) from writing about doping

And Kimmage is a disgrace. He's gotten everything from cycling: a wonderful beginning to his adult life, a career in Sports Journalism (something I aspire to, but don't have the shoe-in name-drops), and all he can do is turn around every six months or so, from (poorly) interviewing Tiger Woods' Caddy, or Jensen Button and give us a load of "I told you so's". Your no fcuking help to the sport of cycling either, Paul.


Now Armstrong might go down, and if he does, so too will cycling. So I ask Kimmage, and Walsh, and fcuking Facepalm Humphries, and even Lemond (I wont include the bitter, single brain-celled Landis), what now, are you going to do to repair the Sport you so-called love? You invented the hydrogen bomb .... now prevent WW3!!!

Sorry, but wtf?
David Walsh was reporting on Irish club cycling when most people on this board were but a twinkle in their father's eye. His love of cycling, and in particular Irish cycling, is simply not in question.
Both Walsh and Kimmage have never made any secret of their growing disenchantment with the sport, because of what it has become. They reflect the attitude and hurt of many genuine cycling fans.
As for their current level of coverage of cycling, well they are now high profile journalists and are expected, by their employers, to cover other, much more popular sports. Yet somehow they "invented the hydrogen bomb" and are now expected to clean up cycling, as if they are the culprits?! Completely and utterly wrong. The culprits are Ferrari, Fuentes, Conconi, McQuaid, Verbruggen, Riijs, Saiz etc (and that's before I get to the riders!). You want to blame a couple of journalists instead?! So telling the story of wrongdoing makes you responsible for the wrongdoing itself? How completely arseways. Kimmage a disgrace?! I can take him or leave him, but how about pointing your ire at the people who are actively fcuking up our sport instead of some journalist?

As for Humphries, I can't stand his smugger-than-thou witterings about how he's better than the rest of us because he spent last Saturday watching the Ballydehob U-14 hurlers and simultaneously keeping alive the spirit of the Gael when the rest of us frauds were watching some foreign game on the tellybox.

Chips Lovell

Ooops, had the wrong link.

Wibbs

Junior wrote: »

People that come on and say 'oh they are all doping' are doing the clean riders a huge disservice. I believe there are more clean riders now than there ever was in the peleton. If there wasn't riders like Dan Martin, Nico Roche etc wouldn't be even comptetive - they would be also rans, donkeys. There are also riders like Gilbert who are classic winners who are staunchly anti doping and you can see him winning, not having domestiques riding away from him.

I agree the problem is they're all under suspicion now. Do I believe there are clean riders? Yes I do, but if I was one of them I'd pretty much give up the notion of ever winning more than a stage in the GT's, especially the TdF. The juicers have just too much of an advantage there. Mad theory alert guys who do well in one day classics, even win them, but are in the middle of the bunch in the GTs are more likely to be clean.

Cycling has always had dopers, mainly because it's one of the most physically demanding and damaging of any sport(if not the most). But the dope of 20,30 and 40 years ago was of a different class. Amphetamines may keep you upright on the bike and push you past the point of exhaustion, but give you an overall advantage in a GT? You're actually more likely to blow out(or die). Things like cortisone aid recovery, so you can fight another day, so again will help. Steroids would have aided muscle bulking, but that would have been only an advantage to certain styles of rider and race.

The early 90's when EPO came along completely changed the landscape. When I followed cycling in the 80's you had more specialists so to speak. That was usually reflected in their physique too. So when the columbians came along to dominate the mountains, you could see why. Skinny little guys with huge lungs. They rarely appeared in the flatter stages sprinting to win in bunch finishes. Then you'd have someone like Kelly. The genetically perfect classics rider and general all rounder. Sure he could keep up with the main bunch in the mountains(through sheer bloody mindedness and insanity on descents), but unless the climbers all had hangovers or missed a break, seeing Sean don the polka dot jersey in Paris would have been a wtf? moment. This given he won every other jersey at one time or another. At one point the points jersey was his for years. They may as well have printed his name on it before the race even started.

If he had been around 10 years later and had "done a lance"? And only have him concentrate on the TdF? I personally have no doubt he would have destroyed LA year after year in the GT's. The blood enhancements would see to that. IMHO out of the box natural? LA is a cut price Kelly(and that's a compliment). Merckx who truly was the ultimate all rounder he aint.

You can't really turn a natural climber into a sprinter with dope. The requirements are different. You certainly cant turn a climber into a sprinter and hope to keep him a climber. With EPO and blood doping, you can turn a sprinter into a climber though. You can make him a sprinter uphill because the blood can supply his engine beyond what is normal. I mean some of these guys are apparently pushing out figures uphill that are in the massively high range on the flat. You can also recover him faster after a balls out effort.

I believe he implemented across his teams to win and destroy all others at all costs. He saw that goal of the TdF win and took it by the other American method 'by any means neccessary' in doing so hd has destroyed the lives of true believers in recovery, in the idea of the comeback. He has disgarded team mates like used needles, he has used and dropped doctors as he sees fit. His biggest mistake was coming out of retirement - he and whatever he did would have stayed buried. His ego just wouldn't leave him alone.

+1 Not unlike the way the eastern bloc had "programmes" in the cold war sporting world. Oh and so did the Americans. If you recall the US Olympic cyclists in 84(IIRC) who admitted to blood doping which wasnt illegal at the time(moser did same in his hour record). To win by any means necessary for the motherland. So LA has this "Go USA!" in his blood. Add in his feelings of rejection by the european teams, throw in the huge financial backing for "team U S A!" and the script was written. So him and his team aimed exclusively at the crown jewels, the TdF. Look how quick they are to accuse the cheese eating surrender monkeys any time they're questioned. Its almost the cold war on carbon wheels.

So how do you stop it? Really really difficult. A reverse sea change would have to happen, but with the serious money involved nowadays I cant see that happening any time soon. Tests can be beaten. It seems quite easily. Even when there is a positive result, if you believe landis when he was caught he was doping, but not using the dope he was accused of. Blood passports help, but even there a decent dope doctor and programme will keep a rider within limits, but consistently enough to win races. Most seem to agree that heamocrit values should drop with the gargantuan efforts these guys put in, but many stay suspiciously normal. So no matter how much they do one day, they're "rested" the next. Its gonna get worse too IMHO. Genetic doping will be the next thing. That's gonna be almost impossible to trace.

Lumen

I don't really understand how it's possible to detect blood doping done carefully.

I understand that the "traditional" way was to take CERA/EPO or whatever for a few days during off-competition then take some blood, to be transfused back in as a "rest day refill". This approach would produce an abnormal reticulocyte profile, since the CERA/EPO boosts cell production.

But surely they can just transfuse "plain vanilla" blood with a normal reticulocyte profile, and effectively boost the red cell count within "normal" limits without producing anything detectable?

Or is there some way to detect blood cell age?

Chips Lovell

Wibbs wrote: »

Mad theory alert guys who do well in one day classics, even win them, but are in the middle of the bunch in the GTs are more likely to be clean.

Yes and no I'd say. Grand tours are incredibly tough on the body and so much of it is about who can recover quickly. Those doping have a big advantage. But some people are simply more suited to classics. And the classics aren't immune to doping. Look over the winners from the past few years and isn't a lot of riders you can be sure are clean. There were guys like Rebellin, who won a rake of classics, but never really figured in the grand tours.

Lumen wrote: »

Or is there some way to detect blood cell age?

That's how they do it, or at least try to do it, as far as I know.

MrCreosote

Lumen wrote: »

I don't really understand how it's possible to detect blood doping done carefully.

I understand that the "traditional" way was to take CERA/EPO or whatever for a few days during off-competition then take some blood, to be transfused back in as a "rest day refill". This approach would produce an abnormal reticulocyte profile, since the CERA/EPO boosts cell production.

But surely they can just transfuse "plain vanilla" blood with a normal reticulocyte profile, and effectively boost the red cell count within "normal" limits without producing anything detectable?

Or is there some way to detect blood cell age?

Homologous transfusions can be picked up- blood from another person. This was Tyler Hamilton's positive test in 2004.

There's no accredited test for autologous doping (where it's your own blood) as far as I know. The WADA site says they're funding research into this. Only way would be to find the equipment used- storing and ferrying around bags of blood isn't to easy. Or finding stored blood like in Operation Puerto. I think part of the blood passport is to give the anti-doping agencies an idea about who to target with this.

Hermy

davyjose wrote: »

I'm a huge fan of professional cycling...

Your criticism of Daivd Walsh and Paul Kimmage suggests otherwise.

joker77

Paul Kimmage has been very quiet on this so far. I'm a big fan of his journalism, and I know he mostly just does the 'person behind the persona' type pieces now for the times, but would love to read his take on all this.

Wonder if he's getting something ready

Hermy

Junior wrote: »

People that come on and say 'oh they are all doping' are doing the clean riders a huge disservice. I believe there are more clean riders now than there ever was in the peleton. If there wasn't riders like Dan Martin, Nico Roche etc wouldn't be even comptetive - they would be also rans, donkeys. There are also riders like Gilbert who are classic winners who are staunchly anti doping and you can see him winning, not having domestiques riding away from him.

@Junior
What makes you so sure about the likes of Roche and Martin?
I'm not suggesting for one second that they aren't clean but sadly Ireland isn't immune to doping.
I'm just wondering what gives you the confidence that these guys are clean.

petethedrummer

joker77 wrote: »

Paul Kimmage has been very quiet on this so far. I'm a big fan of his journalism, and I know he mostly just does the 'person behind the persona' type pieces now for the times, but would love to read his take on all this.

Wonder if he's getting something ready

He has already been on Newstalk, Pat McQuaid wouldn't debate with him and appeared after. He wouldn't debate with Betsy Andreu on Newstalk last year either.
http://www.newstalk.ie/downloads/floyd-landis-accuses-lance-armstrong/

I think he has written a piece about it too. It should be in amongst the links listed in this thread: http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showthread.php?t=7473 Edit: Can't seem to find anything myself, so maybe he hasn't written about it yet.

joker77

Cheers yea, sorry should have specified written about it. I listened the newstalk bit last week, I heard he was also on Pat Kenny earlier in the day but haven't listened to that one

This post has been deleted.

Junior

Hermy wrote: »

@Junior
What makes you so sure about the likes of Roche and Martin?
I'm not suggesting for one second that they aren't clean but sadly Ireland isn't immune to doping.
I'm just wondering what gives you the confidence that these guys are clean.

Because I've seen them race, I saw Nico blow up in the Irish National Championships a few years ago here in Waterford, he was the strongest rider, but he let his head rule his legs and he blew up. I've seen the way they've developed over the past few years, and to be honest, they've been incremental in development and how they've ridden. There's also the fact they've grown up in an era where there are more anti doping voices than ever surrounding them so I think it would be drilled into them more often than not that doping is bad mmmmkay.

Lance spans the decades from when doping was something that was tried, to becoming a science, to becoming a fulltime occupation for some, Roche Martin et al haven't grown into racing with that ethos.

However the real scary thing is the admission from Frei from BMC that he was micro dosing with EPO and he didn't drink the required amount of water that night before the morning test. If this is all it takes to get EPO traces out of the system, we are proper ****ed ..

Lumen

Junior wrote: »

However the real scary thing is the admission from Frei from BMC that he was micro dosing with EPO and he didn't drink the required amount of water that night before the morning test. If this is all it takes to get EPO traces out of the system, we are proper ****ed ..

No, as I understand it the drinking just alters the haematocrit level (proportion of blood volume that is occupied by red blood cells). If you're dehydrated then your blood volume is lower, so higher proportional for the same number of red blood cells. Although I imagine you'd need to drink a lot of water to overcome your kidneys ability to get rid of it.

Hermy

Thanks for the response Junior.
I'd agree with you regarding the progress of the Irish lads - it's been gradual and credible.
And I share you're concerns about Frei, not just his admission, but the fact that there are still young riders who chose to go down the EPO road.

Leslie91

Not sure if this makes a difference or matters one jot but, Floyd Landis is an alcoholic.

I still think there is no smoke without fire though when it comes to Lance.

petethedrummer

American Level Alcoholic or Irish Level Alcoholic? What difference would it make anyway?

Junior

Hermy wrote: »

Thanks for the response Junior.
I'd agree with you regarding the progress of the Irish lads - it's been gradual and credible.
And I share you're concerns about Frei, not just his admission, but the fact that there are still young riders who chose to go down the EPO road.

I think one of things with Frei was that his contract was coming to an end and it seems as if there was pressure put on him to improve, not that this excuses it, however it gives it context, if he was put under pressure and the DS looked the other way asking no questions when he started improving then is the DS not as culpable as Frei is ?

And btw it was a very valid and good question.

Lumen wrote: »

No, as I understand it the drinking just alters the haematocrit level (proportion of blood volume that is occupied by red blood cells). If you're dehydrated then your blood volume is lower, so higher proportional for the same number of red blood cells. Although I imagine you'd need to drink a lot of water to overcome your kidneys ability to get rid of it.

From Frei himself - Link

Frei says that he was caught by chance, adding that he had taken a micro-doses of EPO the previous day - his first injection in three months. His way of getting around the controls was as simple as hydration.

"If I would have drank 1 liter of water after the injection, I would now be preparing myself for the Giro," he admitted.

Leslie91 wrote: »

Not sure if this makes a difference or matters one jot but, Floyd Landis is an alcoholic.

I still think there is no smoke without fire though when it comes to Lance.

Proof or GTFO ..

Chips Lovell

The only place I've seen the alcoholic allegation is from Armstrong supporters. It's no secret the Landis enjoys a few beers, but I've yet to see evidence that he has a drinking problem.

niceonetom

And anyway, who amongst us can really say they've never had a few too many and woken up the next morning to find out we've drunkenly fabricated a very convincing outline of the doping activities of a true American hero? That's why I no longer drink tequila.

robs1

first of all i want to say im a huge armstrong fan but id be foolish to think he did not dope.all the leading guys dope. they did then and lets be realistic they still do.one of the guys had a graph up earlier,you can get that graph with alberto contadors efforts and his is well beyond any of the riders.remember the saying "you cant win the tour on water alone" i think hinulat said that.landis has no money left and is deperate for a contract that can be said.but why did armstrong come back and risk failing a drug test after years of "dodging" positive test. he came third last year and was the most tested rider on the planet.thats were im torn.i hope it comes out to be just crap from landis and that no drug test come back positive.i believe this will bring down cycling because all riders will have to piss in cups every day till thier caught and if they go back on old tests on armstrong well then will have to go back and test everyone.maybe they will just bring in a tour de france sportive and show us live on eurosport crapping ourselves going up mont vontoux

irishmotorist

So what if he's an alcoholic? I don't get the relevance. All he's doing is affecting his own performances - it doesn't make him an imaginative liar with extra ability to discredit the sports biggest name.

frostie500

robs1 wrote: »

i believe this will bring down cycling

I don't really buy any argument that says Lance failing a test and being outed as a doper would bring down cycling. The sport can not continue to be built on a lie, the foundations of such a move ultimately crumble and the sooner we out riders that have no right to don a yellow, pink, golden or rainbow jersey the better.

We have seen years where cycling got a bad rap for having so many positive tests and most of us fans took the view that there was so many because we followed/partook in a sport that realised it needed to proactively clean up its act and test to a massive degree and to hell with what the outside public thought. Operación Puerto was in my view a great step with somewhere in the region of 150 riders implicated, there have been numerous more investigations such as these and while riders will always cheat we need to continue to fight the good fight.

If nothing comes out of these alegations the good work done with some of the previous investigations counts for nothing. If Lance Armstrong doped-and is found guilty of it-cycling will not beleft ruined, it needs to be seen that the greatest sporting fraud of the last 20 years has been shown for his true colours-as a cheat.

I have, like most, long had suspicions as far as Armstrong is concerned and have hated to see so many with their livestrong bands due to my own views on the man. I would truly love for him to be clean-deep down all of do wish that the most successful rider in the Tour was clean-but what reason is there to believe that he is above board? There is far too much smoke for there to have never been a fire.

If he is found guilty bike racing will survive but it will be in spite of riders not as most of his fans believe because of the hope that riders like him give the general public

petethedrummer

robs1 wrote: »

the most tested rider on the planet.

This is a myth started by Armstrong, perpetuated by the Livestrongs and most recently repeated by Pat Mcquaid, who can't keep his story straight about accepting money from his cash cow.

Eric Zabel has had waaaaaayyyyy more wins (stages and races) and would have been tested after each one
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erik_Zabel

Zabel never tested positive but guess what? Zabel admitted to doping.

As for out of competition testing, Armstrong based his European training out of Girona in Spain. Spain, the country that covered up Puerto. And which is still doing F*** all in the fight against doping.

You can make what you will of this thread on the subject...... http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showthread.php?p=221034 .....could be dismissed as a load of internet hearsay or it could be a reasonable guestimate as to how it was.

ROK ON

NYTimes reports that feds are considering broadening the Armstrong investigation beyond doping and drug distribution and including fraud and conspiracy.
Focus on whether the team bought PEDS and will also examine the insurance contract with SCA Promotions.

Beasty

ROK ON wrote: »

NYTimes reports that feds are considering broadening the Armstrong investigation beyond doping and drug distribution and including fraud and conspiracy.
Focus on whether the team bought PEDS and will also examine the insurance contract with SCA Promotions.

Link here

joker77

The federales don't have a vested interest, this could be a real chance to blow the whole thing wide open.