Floyd -- he wrote us a letter...

DaveyL

I'm sorry but someone is really going to have to explain to me how it is to the benefit of a rider under suspicion to withdraw from a race. I've seen all this innuendo time and time again but what exactly would be the point?

rundle

donrhummy wrote:

rundle wrote:

Armstrong will likely never be seen racing a bicycle again. Ever.

Anywhere.

Most certainly not in France.

If you think that, you haven't followed cycling and Lance Armstrong in the past 10 years.

No,

I've been following this stupid bloody sport for 40 years.

Is that enough for you?

And yes, I do believe it.

stagehopper

Doobz wrote:

hmm..

He could be speaking into his radio on that pic.

RichN95.

DaveyL wrote:

I'm sorry but someone is really going to have to explain to me how it is to the benefit of a rider under suspicion to withdraw from a race. I've seen all this innuendo time and time again but what exactly would be the point?

To avoid the media. I think he's probably genuinely injured though.

AidanR

Yeah, but his upper arm is scraped. I think it's more likely he's fiddling with his jersey than broken his collarbone.

DaveyL

RichN95 wrote:

DaveyL wrote:

I'm sorry but someone is really going to have to explain to me how it is to the benefit of a rider under suspicion to withdraw from a race. I've seen all this innuendo time and time again but what exactly would be the point?

To avoid the media. I think he's probably genuinely injured though.

To avoid the media? You're kidding, right?

OK, we'll see if he avoids the media now he's not in the race...

Kléber

We can only speculate. The timing is horrendous.

rundle

DaveyL wrote:

I'm sorry but someone is really going to have to explain to me how it is to the benefit of a rider under suspicion to withdraw from a race. I've seen all this innuendo time and time again but what exactly would be the point?

He's on his way home to Texas right now to clean out the fridge and get behind a high wall where the press can't ask him any questions.

RichN95.

DaveyL wrote:

RichN95 wrote:

DaveyL wrote:

I'm sorry but someone is really going to have to explain to me how it is to the benefit of a rider under suspicion to withdraw from a race. I've seen all this innuendo time and time again but what exactly would be the point?

To avoid the media. I think he's probably genuinely injured though.

To avoid the media? You're kidding, right?

OK, we'll see if he avoids the media now he's not in the race...

He won't avoid them completely, but he'll be able have more control over the situation as opposed to being ambushed by loads of journos at the finish.

That's just a reason why he might do it, but as I said, he's probably genuinely injured.

iainf72

Kléber wrote:

We can only speculate. The timing is horrendous.

Quite.

This year I've got the impression he's not enjoying the cycling and is possibly regretting his comeback. I wouldn't be surprised to see him re-evaluate his choices, and an injury is an ideal time.

DaveyL

rundle wrote:

DaveyL wrote:

I'm sorry but someone is really going to have to explain to me how it is to the benefit of a rider under suspicion to withdraw from a race. I've seen all this innuendo time and time again but what exactly would be the point?

He's on his way home to Texas right now to clean out the fridge and get behind a high wall where the press can't ask him any questions.

Shame that dude Koresh isn't still kicking around...

emadden

Recap: The great Kimmage & Armstrong Press Conference at last year's ToC:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nZgns7CXeUI&feature=related

gabriel959

iainf72 wrote:

Kléber wrote:

We can only speculate. The timing is horrendous.

Quite.

This year I've got the impression he's not enjoying the cycling and is possibly regretting his comeback. I wouldn't be surprised to see him re-evaluate his choices, and an injury is an ideal time.

Indeed. Its probable he lacks the motivation as he knows he will have it really hard in order to win the TdF.

micron

Excellent - they're rolling out the 'good guys' defence http://www.sltrib.com/news/ci_15126807

Interesting how already certain sectors of the press are pursuing a 'disgraced cyclist' v 'cancer survivor' rhetoric.

emadden

afx237vi

micron wrote:

Excellent - they're rolling out the 'good guys' defence http://www.sltrib.com/news/ci_15126807

Interesting how already certain sectors of the press are pursuing a 'disgraced cyclist' v 'cancer survivor' rhetoric.

"Cycling is a great sport but there are surprises," Testa said. "It's tough to comment on now until we know more, but my mentality is Levi is a good guy and has been very outspoken against drugs. It would be hard to picture him being involved."

Really? When was that then?

iainf72

Brailsford on Barry

http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/news/lat ... barry.html

Kléber

Max Testa, the guy who supplied Motorola riders with pamphlets on how to use EPO. He said he was worried about riders misusing it.

Former Motorola team doctor Max Testa did speak to the New York Times about his concerns regarding EPO use during the mid-1990s. Testa, now a sports medicine specialist at the University of California at Davis, explained he had given the team's riders literature about EPO and urged them not to take the drug.

"If you want to use a gun, you had better use a manual, rather than to ask the guy on the street how to use it," he said. "I cannot rule out that someone did it."

greeny12

iainf72 wrote:

Brailsford on Barry

http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/news/lat ... barry.html

Crikey - that's a straight bat but if I was Barry I'd be cr@pping myself just now...

finchy

Lance replies.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/other_s ... 695890.stm

afx237vi

iainf72 wrote:

Brailsford on Barry

http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/news/lat ... barry.html

Fair enough, I think. Interesting comment about HTC.

iainf72

greeny12 wrote:

Crikey - that's a straight bat but if I was Barry I'd be cr@pping myself just now...

Depends - Dave's using the tried and testing method of "asking" him.

And if he does something about that, I can suggest another couple of riders on his team he "asks" about their past.

DaveyL

Jesus, what do you suggest Brailsford does?

iainf72

DaveyL wrote:

Jesus, what do you suggest Brailsford does?

Well, it's all he can do, but it's basically doing nothing, isn't it?

I was just saying it was a non-answer.

DaveyL

Did you miss this bit then?

"You handle it by using the facts and sticking to a process. The first part of that process is establishing the facts.

"When we have the solid concrete facts, then you know where to go and what to do and we'll act accordingly. We're in the sports to race clean and that's what we'll do."

"If Michael Barry holds his hands up - or anyone else does for that matter - and says ‘actually you know what guys, I doped', that then goes automatically up to the next level which is WADA [World Anti doping Authority].

"I imagine that will then go forward, the procedure kicks in and we will take appropriate action. It's simple. Establish the facts. Then process."

RichN95.

afx237vi wrote:

iainf72 wrote:

Brailsford on Barry

http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/news/lat ... barry.html

Fair enough, I think. Interesting comment about HTC.

More or less exactly what I expected he'd say. He had to get a mention of 'marginal gains' in though, which made me chuckle.

iainf72

Cherry Picking Davey. You forgot the next bit

Had Brailsford yet spoken to Barry about the allegations?

"He's been racing, so no, I haven't," he replied. "I'm sure he will talk at the hotel tonight and we'll establish the facts

So they'll talk and establish the facts, yes?

So, in a way, I'm down with what Dave says. Has Barry been doing it clear for the last 3-4 years? Yes, it seems likely. But the problem with the sport is it can bite you on the butt big style

RichN95.

iainf72 wrote:

DaveyL wrote:

Jesus, what do you suggest Brailsford does?

Well, it's all he can do, but it's basically doing nothing, isn't it?

I was just saying it was a non-answer.

The problem is that for the last four years Landis has been viewed as a little unbalanced and a compulsive liar, so you can't start taking action solely on the basis of his allegations.

DaveyL

Yes, you already mentioned the "He'll talk to him bit"... I was adding in the bit you missed. Maybe he shouldn't talk to him? That would be odd.

What else can he do? If no concrete evidence is forthcoming, you can't do suspend a rider just based on an allegation. Of course, they could decide he stinks a bit too much and let him go, but other than that I don't know what we ought to expect of Brailsford.

iainf72

You're right Rich. As pathetic as it sounds you really just want them to say "We hope the authorities investigate the allegations and get to a conclusion"