Do you think Floyd Landis used drugs

love2ride
love2ride Posts: 224
edited February 2009 in Workshop
Hi
do you think Floyd Landis used drugs or not?
I read his book and it convinced me he didn't, especially with all the mistakes they made in the testing. but then he would say that to try and defend himself so could possibly be lieing.
thanks
Will

Comments

  • Author in 'trying to put across his side of the argument' shocker.
    Of course he did. He's a professional road cyclist.
  • calm down. we all have our own oppinions.
  • MrChuck
    MrChuck Posts: 1,663
    I voted maybe, but I must say that I was inclined to think he was innocent. I think it was a combination of the lengths he went to in fighting it, the pointlessness of doing it in the first place under those circumstances and it certainly didn't look like the testing process was above reproach either.
  • love2ride wrote:
    calm down. we all have our own oppinions.
    ?
    I'm calm. And you asked for opinions, so I gave mine.
  • MrChuck wrote:
    I voted maybe, but I must say that I was inclined to think he was innocent. I think it was a combination of the lengths he went to in fighting it, the pointlessness of doing it in the first place under those circumstances and it certainly didn't look like the testing process was above reproach either.

    What do you mean by pointlessness? When he was found positive for testosterone was after the stage he won, after a hardly believable breakaway on his own for most of the very hilly stage.
    He was in yellow in Paris because of that stage, how can you say pointlessness?

    He tried... he could have been lucky getting away with it. Tests are not infallible. If he did get away, we would be talking about the greatest breakaway ever.

    Obviously I have no doubts in my mind that he was positive.

    Mistakes have been made in the handling of the sample, but, beside him, nobody had any doubt the positive sample was Landis's
    left the forum March 2023
  • cougie
    cougie Posts: 22,512
    Of course he put pretty good arguments across in his own book. But any half decent expert would be able to tear these apart.

    I'm 99.9% sure he did cheat.
  • You don't ride like Frank the tank one day and then like Lance Armstrong the next without being on some kind of artificial aid.
    Tail end Charlie

    The above post may contain traces of sarcasm or/and bullsh*t.
  • MrChuck
    MrChuck Posts: 1,663
    What do you mean by pointlessness? When he was found positive for testosterone was after the stage he won, after a hardly believable breakaway on his own for most of the very hilly stage.
    He was in yellow in Paris because of that stage, how can you say pointlessness?

    Well, that is basically what I mean. He knew he'd be tested after winning the stage, and AFAIK it's basically a given that testosterone would be detected. It's not like he was using one of these at-the-time-thought-to-be-undetectable EPO variants that caught people out last summer.

    So what would be the point of doping to win the stage in the virtually certain knowledge he'd be tested instantly and caught?

    But I'm not a blind Landis defender, I just thought there were grounds to at least lend some credibility to the view that he didn't do it.

    As an aside, I seem to remember several people pointing out at the time that the breakaway in itself wasn't that unbelievable, and that the result was as much down to everyone else dropping the ball as to his ride.

    Like I said though, I'm not a zealot on his behalf, just thought it would be a strange thing for him (or anyone) to do in those circumstances.
  • MrChuck wrote:
    What do you mean by pointlessness? When he was found positive for testosterone was after the stage he won, after a hardly believable breakaway on his own for most of the very hilly stage.
    He was in yellow in Paris because of that stage, how can you say pointlessness?

    Well, that is basically what I mean. He knew he'd be tested after winning the stage, and AFAIK it's basically a given that testosterone would be detected. It's not like he was using one of these at-the-time-thought-to-be-undetectable EPO variants that caught people out last summer.

    So what would be the point of doping to win the stage in the virtually certain knowledge he'd be tested instantly and caught?

    But I'm not a blind Landis defender, I just thought there were grounds to at least lend some credibility to the view that he didn't do it.

    As an aside, I seem to remember several people pointing out at the time that the breakaway in itself wasn't that unbelievable, and that the result was as much down to everyone else dropping the ball as to his ride.

    Like I said though, I'm not a zealot on his behalf, just thought it would be a strange thing for him (or anyone) to do in those circumstances.

    Well, he's not the only one caught for testosterone, I'm sure he had his way to hide it and was confident to get away with it... just that time it didn't work as expected
    left the forum March 2023
  • Monty Dog
    Monty Dog Posts: 20,614
    The fact that it was synthetic T is concrete proof that he was doping - there is no tangible explanation as to how it got into his system, unless you're a conspiracy theorist. It was due to the fact that he screwed-up his dosing that he was caught - if he hadn't cocked-up his ratios then they wouldn't have done the mass-spectrometry to show that the T was artificial. It wasn't a one-off either - retro-spective testing shows his other samples were tainted too. It was quite likely that he was using other substances too - just they were undetectable. You're not Floyd Fan under a different moniker by any chance - where did he go anyway?
    Make mine an Italian, with Campagnolo on the side..
  • andyp
    andyp Posts: 10,313
    For all Landis' attacks on the system, a system which he'd signed up to and supported previously, he's never explained away the presence of synthetic testosterone in his samples.

    He was caught fair and square.
  • MrChuck
    MrChuck Posts: 1,663
    Monty Dog wrote:
    You're not Floyd Fan under a different moniker by any chance - where did he go anyway?

    If you're asking me, then no I'm not! :D I'm not going to defend him, as you say if synthetic testosterone was in his system then that's it. I didn't follow the ins and outs enough to know how the arguments about failures in procedure went, and whether they were enough to suggest a false positive to anyone except the most ardent conspiracy theorist anyway. I was just surprised at the time that he'd failed a test, and before the appeal/trial/whatever it was I half expected him to be able to show enough doubt to get off.

    Like I said before:
    I'm not a blind Landis defender, I just thought there were grounds to at least lend some credibility to the view that he didn't do it.

    If those have been addressed and dismissed then fair enough.
  • andyp wrote:
    For all Landis' attacks on the system, a system which he'd signed up to and supported previously, he's never explained away the presence of synthetic testosterone in his samples.

    Uh, yes he did: four shots of Jack Daniels and two beers.

    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB115401036353719085.html

    According to Landis, he got drunk the night before his epic stage in high heat. Everyone knows that cycling after a night of drinking is really, really good for performance.

    It's not the excuses and lies that bother me, as much as his insults to basic intelligence.

    The only other thing that bothers me is fanboys who flocked to forums and typed, "innocent until proven guilty", then he's found guilty, then he appeals,then he's still found guilty.

    Which means that when the truth comes out about his ex-teamate, nothing will change with the fans.

    This is why it's embarrassing to admit I'm a cycling fan.

    I just tell people I'm watching porn.
  • I voted 'yes' because I trust nobody!! :twisted:
    AT MY AGE, I SHOULD KNOW BETTER !!!
  • toontra
    toontra Posts: 1,160
    I voted yes because he tested positive! He can moan all he likes but that doesn't change the facts - i just makes him all the more of a liar.


    a serious case of small cogs
  • Kléber
    Kléber Posts: 6,842
    People can speculate on here but at every hearing Landis has been found guilty. Whether in France, the US or in front of the international Court of Arbitration for Sport, he's been exposed as a cheat and liar.
  • I got his book last year and im just reading it now for the 2nd time.
    I voted maybe.. He does have a strong case.
    Its so hard to know in cycling.
    Ivuse steroids in the past (bodybuilding) and i did quite abit of cycling at the time and i never really found any benefit, i bonked more often and needed far more food.
    It never really made me any faster, extra muscle weight as well.
    I can understand really small guys using it but landis wasnt that small.
    I cant really see it making a difference of that much in one stage, its more a sprinters tool.

    Everyone always has a strong opinion on drugs and who's taking them but only a few people know for sure, ive read walshes books and lances books and virtually every other book... theres 2 sides to every story.

    Im amazed at how many fans pantani has when he screwed his life up and was caught taking drugs and how many people hate lance when he's never been caught and has made a succes out of his life.
  • squired
    squired Posts: 1,153
    The synthetic testosterone seals it for me. All the ratios stuff is irrelevant when you take into account the fact he had synthetic testosterone in him. Having said that, if they applied the same test to all sportsment I expect we'd have thousands sitting on bans right now.
  • meagain
    meagain Posts: 2,331
    Why no "couldn't care less" category?
    d.j.
    "Cancel my subscription to the resurrection."
  • Mister W
    Mister W Posts: 791
    I suspect he has taken performance enhancing drugs but I seriously doubt he is guilty of the offence he was charged with. It doesn't make any sense to take testosterone at that point in the race. It wouldn't have contributed to his performance that day.
  • Mister W
    Mister W Posts: 791
    I suspect he has taken performance enhancing drugs but I seriously doubt he is guilty of the offence he was charged with. It doesn't make any sense to take testosterone at that point in the race. It wouldn't have contributed to his performance that day.
  • I was there that day of the infamous ride and the day before, i remember coming down the mountain amazed at what I'd just seen. I remember joking to people that he must have had an amazing breakfast as i saw him crack the day before and he was barely moving. i always believed that he was innocent as I didn't believe testosterone to be a drug that could have had the correct effects to motor his amazing ride. I then read his book and still believed him to be innocent, he had a very strong arguement in everything that he stated but the alarm for me was the fact that it was synthetic testosterone in his system.

    THEN i read the Bradley Wiggins book. Wiggins gives an explanation to what he believes happened and I think in hindsight this to be the most liley scenario. Floyd took a blood transfusion that night using blood that he'd stored from earlier in the season, however he/his team didn't realise that this blood would still contain traces of testosterone that he's been using in an earlier 'training' cycle. I don't think the blood transfusion test was used in 2006, but was available in 2007 which caught Vino. This explanation makes a lot of sense

    So yes I do think Floyd doped on that day. I hate to say it and hoped for years he was innocent as I really liked him as a rider. The tests/quantities etc may have anomalies but the fact that it was synthetic testosterone in his system shows something there that shouldn't have been.
  • ive read wiggins book and i totally forgot that! i agree, its as sound a theory as any
  • guv001
    guv001 Posts: 688
    Guilty
  • I got his book last year and im just reading it now for the 2nd time.
    I voted maybe.. He does have a strong case.
    .

    But you are getting your information from a proven liar.

    Anyone can write anything in a book.
  • I got his book last year and im just reading it now for the 2nd time.
    I voted maybe.. He does have a strong case.
    .

    But you are getting your information from a proven liar.

    Anyone can write anything in a book.

    everything we know is taught pretty much through books and written words, all the allegations are written.... Your right, Anyone can write anything
  • dennisn
    dennisn Posts: 10,601
    I got his book last year and im just reading it now for the 2nd time.
    I voted maybe.. He does have a strong case.
    .

    But you are getting your information from a proven liar.

    Anyone can write anything in a book.

    We are all proven liars, so to speak.

    Yes, anything can be written. Or maybe it's more like "what can be written, will".

    Dennis Noward