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

Junior · 24-01-2011 10:30PM

Quigs Snr wrote: »

Interesting point Junior. I have followed Wiggins career, read his books etc... and was just saying the other day that he was extremely anti-doping. But his stance on Lance in particular has become quite inconsistent with that in recent years. It's very obvious what went on with Lance and co back in the day, and it seems it will all soon be proven, so I had been taking this as Wiggins trying to protect his pay check as bad for Armstrong might be bad for sponsors and bad for pay cheques. I am not so sure though..

Et Tu Wiggo ?

I would have thought JV was certainly on the sauce at some point, but he's never come clean on that. It's been hinted at in that IM conversation with Frankie Andreu I think. I think however Wiggo has been whipped into media silence since he joined Sky. As you pointed out he's gotten so far up the pay scale now he's thinking, right am I that stupid to sh*t where I eat, plus I presume Sky don't want him saying anything out of turn ..

niceonetom wrote: »

I haven't seen the email (I might do some googling though) in which Landis points fingers at Vaughters and Wiggins. I presume he's saying that Vaughters was doping back in the day though, right? No big deal. Because I don't think Vaughters even denies that any more. He doesn't, I think, explicitly confirm it either, but he did describe his Mt Ventoux record as a "science experiment" or words to that effects...

If, on the other hand, Landis is accusing Vaughters of being complicit in doping NOW, well, that's a much more serious thing. Garmin Slipstream built riding clean into the team brand, into the image, they were always going on about that ethos - to find out that was or is a sham would be very very bad. The ethos, or at least the pretence of that ethos has seemingly survived the Cervélo merger too. Cervélo also maintained an official line of scrupulous purity and now they've gone to the extreme of firing Matt White for associating with Dr. Luis Garcia del Moral. If Matt White was sending Garmin riders to Spanish doctors for "advice" in 2009, I'm mentally adding a little question mark next to Wiggins' name... and other names too. Gah!

This sport. You need a tough skin to keep loving it.

Right I did some searching between twitter and google cache and I've found a copy of the article ..

Link here Your mileage may vary, I've pulled that up from google cache..

Cheers
J

Lumen · 25-01-2011 11:10AM

100Suns wrote: »

Has there been any serious analysis of Wiggo's performance in the 2009 Tour with Garmin and 2010 with Sky? Has he offered any explanation for the difference in performance levels despite the (british) media expectations? His transition to the road, including body reshaping, has been remarkable.

Well, he lost a bunch of weight. I wouldn't call it a body reshaping.

I am open minded, but Wiggins' 2009 performance, whilst very impressive, looked at least plausible given his previous athletic form (unless the British track cycling programme included systematic doping).

Anyway, he finished over six minutes down, broken in terms of losses to Contador as:

0'01" in stage 1 (ITT)
0'40" on stage 7 (mountain)
1'00" on stage 15 (mountain)
3'07" on stage 17 (mountain)
0'43" on stage 18 (ITT)
1'03" on stage 20 (mountain)

So he was losing gobs of time here and there in the mountains, and whilst he held his own against Contador in the first ITT when fresh, he then lost 43 seconds in the second ITT two weeks later.

He clearly didn't have anything in reserve, or he'd have beaten Lance to third place. OTOH Wiggins has clearly profited from the 2009 result so the motive is there, and I hope that Landis' allegations are fully investigated.

As far as 2010 was concerned, ISTR he claimed that he ballsed up the preparation by going too hard in the Giro, at which he appeared to suffer greatly on the steep bits.

The problem is that modern doping seems to have become about gaining relatively small advantages for relatively low risk, so scrutinising good but unexceptional performances is a bit of a dead end.

Quigs Snr · 25-01-2011 01:09PM

I think perhaps more alarming in those figures is how Contador beat Wiggins in the ITT's, particularly the short prologue.

Lumen · 25-01-2011 01:52PM

Quigs Snr wrote: »

I think perhaps more alarming in those figures is how Contador beat Wiggins in the ITT's, particularly the short prologue.

Breaking news: Contador stripped of title.

That presumably means Wiggins is on the podium, which makes him a doper. FACT.

spokeydokey · 25-01-2011 02:20PM

Lumen wrote: »

Breaking news: Contador stripped of title.

That presumably means Wiggins is on the podium, which makes him a doper. FACT.

I'm confused..... are you talking about 2009 or 2010

Lumen · 25-01-2011 02:21PM

spokeydokey wrote: »

I'm confused..... are you talking about 2009 or 2010

Sorry, brain fart. I lost a whole year there somewhere.

Dura Ace · 28-01-2011 08:27AM

Paul Kimmage's interview with Landis is in the paper this weekend.

http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/public/magazine/article524615.ece

petethedrummer · 28-01-2011 12:05PM

Oh Bradley

“I think you have to question Landis’ credibility because he lied under oath before and the stories that you hear about him drinking and things like that and you know.....

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/wiggins-calls-for-biological-passport-data-to-be-made-public

mloc123 · 28-01-2011 12:22PM

Is it just me or is Wiggins a pain in the hole?

sy · 28-01-2011 01:09PM

This reminds me of the late great Warren Zevon whos addiction to drugs booze and guns! regularly featured in his many brilliant songs . The following song (best version is on the live album Stand in the Fire) might just sum up the final showdown for a certain mister LA. The closing line reads " Send Lawyers guns and money the sh**t has hit the fan" Love it

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PwXMkfeH95k

ROK ON · 28-01-2011 01:58PM

@sy. You brightened up my day. But if I was Landis I would hope that Roland the thompson gunner was the man with the gun :-)

Chartsengrafs · 28-01-2011 11:29PM

Kimmage is on iTalk Sport on Setanta Sports at the minute. Blunt as ever, took me a while to log on but it'll be on a while yet. So far has gone on about the Roches, Lance, Landis...

Chartsengrafs · 28-01-2011 11:33PM

Sorry, just noticed this is being spoken about in the Contador thread..

c0rk3r · 30-01-2011 12:10PM

A meh article, not worth the €1.50. Its a brief summary of Flyods life up until now with barely anything mentioned of Lance and the drug scandal around it. On talk sport Kimmage said he spent 8 hours chatting to landis and it took 1 week to transcribe. I imagine he couldn't print a large percentage of what he said because Flyod has continually lied over x amount of years. Id love to know what was said but you simply cant trust him and as a journalist have to be very careful what you print

meh

Lumen · 30-01-2011 01:34PM

c0rk3r wrote: »

A meh article, not worth the €1.50. Its a brief summary of Flyods life up until now with barely anything mentioned of Lance and the drug scandal around it.

Well, it's a Sunday magazine human interest piece about Landis, not Lance. I quite enjoyed it. The stuff about Verbruggen and the guarantee was new to me.

snollup · 30-01-2011 04:55PM

Lumen wrote: »

Well, it's a Sunday magazine human interest piece about Landis, not Lance. I quite enjoyed it. The stuff about Verbruggen and the guarantee was new to me.

I went straight for the sports section and not finding it though news review & then the main news section. Was thinking I must have bought the wrong paper until my wife pointed out that it was in the magazine. I never would have looked there. As for the article, quite enjoyed it.

mo_bhicycle · 30-01-2011 05:16PM

Lumen wrote: »

The stuff about Verbruggen and the guarantee was new to me.

What was said about Verbruggen and the guarantee?

Lumen · 30-01-2011 06:57PM

mo_bhicycle wrote: »

What was said about Verbruggen and the guarantee?

In 2001, after four months of waiting for and correspondence with the UCI to draw on the guarantee from the Mercury team to pay his salary, Floyd got a lawyer involved. Verbruggen replied "Such an aggressive approach might perhaps work in the USA, but it does not in Europe and most definitely not with me...I have given order to our legal department to take the tone of your approach into account when it comes to following up on your request". He was finally paid in 2004.

Makes the UCI seem a bit, er, childish.

DeadMan1 · 30-01-2011 07:21PM

Also seemed to imply Landis was in danger of making enemies in the UCI -not clever - until Lance made him apologise.
seems to suggest we read between the lines here

spokeydokey · 31-01-2011 02:15PM

c0rk3r wrote: »

A meh article, not worth the €1.50. Its a brief summary of Flyods life up until now with barely anything mentioned of Lance and the drug scandal around it. On talk sport Kimmage said he spent 8 hours chatting to landis and it took 1 week to transcribe. I imagine he couldn't print a large percentage of what he said because Flyod has continually lied over x amount of years. Id love to know what was said but you simply cant trust him and as a journalist have to be very careful what you print

meh

Here you go... full interview and no charge;)

http://nyvelocity.com/content/interviews/2011/landiskimmage

buzzingnoise · 31-01-2011 06:12PM

spokeydokey wrote: »

Here you go... full interview and no charge;)

http://nyvelocity.com/content/interviews/2011/landiskimmage

wow, a whole evenings work ruined by kimmage and landis!!
interesting read. i feel sorry for him. take home message is "it sucks to get caught". pro cycling is tough enough without having to deal with this crap.

c0rk3r · 31-01-2011 08:38PM

spokeydokey wrote: »

Here you go... full interview and no charge;)

Cheers, kinda bitter i spent that €1.50

Cynical me was thinking id have to wait 4 years until this sorry show is over and Kimmage releases a book with details of the interview. Guess not.

Kimmage 1, c0rk3r 0

leftism · 31-01-2011 09:36PM

buzzingnoise wrote: »

wow, a whole evenings work ruined by kimmage and landis!!

+1! I'm pissed off at Landis for robbing me of the last 2 hours... This is the first time that doping in cycling has had a direct impact on my life!

Great interview though. It sucks how much get removed in the editorial process...

horizon26 · 01-02-2011 12:22AM

spokey dokey wrote: »

Here you go... full interview and no charge;)

http://nyvelocity.com/content/interviews/2011/landiskimmage

I I have defended Lance Armstrong and Contador on this very site.Paul Kimmage gets right to the heart of the drug taking in cycling.He writes with courage and doesn't care that people might ridicule him.

I am now totally convinced that Armstrong and Contador use drugs to win the biggest races in cycling.Kimmage and Landis really opened my eyes,Kimmage must be the most fearless journalist there is.And I doubted him shame on me.

fat bloke · 01-02-2011 12:51AM

That is one amazing evening of journalism, and a truly fascinating read.

petethedrummer · 01-02-2011 01:32AM

nyvelocity seems to be down, so here it is in pdf. I haven't read it yet.

http://assets.sbnation.com/assets/533362/landis_kimmage.pdf

RobFowl · 01-02-2011 02:26AM

It's a good article. Well written and makes you realise quite how much Floyd has lost.
It also seems clear that he was a willing doper and is fairly unapologetic about it.
He has so little left that it makes everything he says seem to have the ring of truth about it.
Bet LA is regretting his comeback now. If he'd left it as it was in 2005 then he'd have pretty much gotten away with everything.
As it stands it seems that all will come out in the federal investigation.
Can't see him doing time as he hasn't lied under oath but his reputation will be in tatters by the time it's finished if not already.

hinault · 01-02-2011 02:43AM

RobFowl wrote: »

It's a good article. Well written and makes you realise quite how much Floyd has lost.
It also seems clear that he was a willing doper and is fairly unapologetic about it.
He has so little left that it makes everything he says seem to have the ring of truth about it.
Bet LA is regretting his comeback now. If he'd left it as it was in 2005 then he'd have pretty much gotten away with everything.
As it stands it seems that all will come out in the federal investigation.
Can't see him doing time as he hasn't lied under oath but his reputation will be in tatters by the time it's finished if not already.

If LA lies to the Feds and is found to have lied, then he will be prosecuted and imprisoned.

US law is very strict in that regard.

hinault · 01-02-2011 03:28AM

velo.2010 wrote: »

Just in from an easy 3 hour cycle a-Hem, a-Hem.;)

So can we say without doubt that Jan Ullrich WAS the better cyclist!
OK we know he doped, Pevenage admitted to it last year, but there is surely no way he was up to the same kind of sh!t as Armstrong. I'm happy to stand corrected on that.

Now I understand why so many commentators were always adament Ullrich was stronger than Armstrong. They knew....they knew it wasn't possible for a guy who couldn't previously climb that well to suddenly put 6 or 7 minutes into a rider like Ullrich. What a desperate git Armstrong must have been to go to that length to win.

Last year we got an idea perhaps just how he would have performed without the pharmatilogical back-up he had in previous years. He had a strong Prologue, not surprising as he has always been good in that disipline but he looked distinctly average in the mountains not-withstanding his earlier crashes.

Re. the Livestrong foundation. It means a lot to so many people and obviously should survive in some form to continue the services it provides. Maybe people will be less inclined to heap so much praise on Armstrong after this saga finally comes to an end.

Jan Ullrich.
I remember being in Oslo in 1993 at the Road Worlds Championship and Jan's reputation as a great cyclist on the amateur circuit had already been built.
He was a superb talent.

He debut in 1996 TDF alone signalled his quality as a rider. Arguably he could have won that years TDF.

Armstrong? He was a donkey in comparison until he, err, "improved":rolleyes:

Lumen · 01-02-2011 07:21AM

hinault wrote: »

If LA lies to the Feds and is found to have lied, then he will be prosecuted and imprisoned.

US law is very strict in that regard.

Landis is still walking around, and he's admitted to perjury. Maybe they're just slow.

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

Comments