Do you think Floyd Landis is telling the truth about Lance?

13

Comments

  • Pross
    Pross Posts: 43,463
    I went yes. When rumours first started going around about LA doping my instinct was that a man who had come close to death would be unlikely to risk his health and would have a different perspective on the importance of winning at all costs but there just seems to be more and more smoke. Although it could just be spite on behalf of a proven drug cheat determined to soil the sport as much as possible out of revenge.
  • magicrhodes
    magicrhodes Posts: 123
    NO, I don't! I think Floyd Landisgrace should disappear under his rock. If you have irrefutable proof then supply it, if you don't shut the hell up!

    Comments like his just make him more of "the problem" that he was trying to stop being.
  • Lightning
    Lightning Posts: 360
    Richrd2205 wrote:
    How much of an advantage do you think it gives you?
    How much is the difference between first and last in the TdF (in percentage terms)?
    Do a search and find which is greater....
    Do you think the variations in training are all that significant? Why? How? With all the information I can get as someone who's faintly interested, do you think you can get more than 1 or 2 &% on me with access to all legal methods? If so tell me why & how, please.
    No-one' assuming he's a doper. People have considered & weighed the evidence. You've merely offered an opinion (which contains both factual & logical errors). You're welcome to your opinion, but without evidence or facts, it remains just that. I'll stick with the facts, thanks!
    Think of the best rider you know of you know who's clean (or think). Why aren't you as good as him?

    This is all about opinions. What makes you think you're the one who's right here? Maybe you should be head of the UCI then and just "study" your facts and say who's a doper or not. Who needs tests? You have your opinion and I have mine. You're saying you have the facts, well here's a fact for you: Lance was never caught. Yes, that's a fact, not an opinion.
  • cougie
    cougie Posts: 22,512
    Apart from the retrospective tests for EPO carried out for the 1999 tour you mean.
  • neilr4
    neilr4 Posts: 161
    samiam wrote:
    People want or need to believe his victories are real because the alternative, that his career is without doubt the biggest fraud in sporting history, is far far too scary.

    Forget Marion Jones. Forget Ben Johnson.

    Armstrong would have created an enormous empire based on nothing but lies and cheating. Not only that, but he would have (with several others) destroyed an immensely important and historic international sport which would, or will regardless, take decades to recover.

    Oh well.. it's always darkest before the dawn.

    Very true!!

    I don't think Floyd is lying but he has NO credibility because of his past!!
    'REMEMBER SOME PEOPLE ARE ALIVE
    SIMPLY BECAUSE IT IS ILLEGAL TO SHOOT THEM'
  • blazing_saddles
    blazing_saddles Posts: 22,725
    FLandis doped in 2006. That is now an established fact. He says he was spending $90,000 a year on his "medical programme".
    All of this seems to me to be pretty much indisputable, now.

    He says that he was mentored into this regime, by Lance and Bruyneel, over the course of his career.
    The only alternative to this is that he went from a clean rider, to a "top end" cheater, during the period it took to change teams.
    OK, so for the "alternative" to become the acceptable option, you have to also believe the following coincidences to be true.

    Tyler Hamilton leaves USPS clean and become a serialised doper immeadiately thereafter.
    Roberto Heras leaves "Dirty Fuentes's" Kelme, become a clean USPS double winner of the Vuelta, leaves and return to "Dirty Fuentes's" Liberty Seguros.
    Frankie Andreu was the only one of the 1999 USPS 49ers who had to use EPO to boost his hematocrit level in order to make the draft.
    The 1999 positive samples were all, somehow contaminated and somehow registered for synthetic EPO, or, L'Equipe, the French Lab abd the UCI are lying.
    Jonathan Vaughters talking in riddles, is just that.
    "Science is a tool for cheaters". An anonymous French PE teacher.
  • Richrd2205
    Richrd2205 Posts: 1,267
    Lightning wrote:
    Think of the best rider you know of you know who's clean (or think). Why aren't you as good as him?

    This is all about opinions. What makes you think you're the one who's right here? Maybe you should be head of the UCI then and just "study" your facts and say who's a doper or not. Who needs tests? You have your opinion and I have mine. You're saying you have the facts, well here's a fact for you: Lance was never caught. Yes, that's a fact, not an opinion.
    OK, please search through this forum. This argument has been had thousands of times & your points roundly answered. To quickly summarise:
    -the distribution of genetic difference at elite level is very small (gaussian distribution). Your assertion that the gap is the same as between me & a.n.other is absurd. You never find that gap at the ends of distribution curves, to suggest you can is ridiculous.
    -Lance has been caught 2 or 3 times. Just never sanctioned. That's different. He has clearly used.
    As I said, there were factual errors in your original post. There are further ones in this one. Try searching the archives of this site to start with, or you could try here.
    This is not about opinions at all, as I said in my first post. There are undisputed facts out there, which can then be weighed & considered.
    Interpretation of the facts can be a matter of opinion, agreed, but you kind of need to be familiar with those facts before interpreting them :wink:
  • sherer
    sherer Posts: 2,460
    ok this stuff has only been out in the open for a day but already we have had the UCI turn a blink eye and everyone else deny it. I expect this story will soon be buried and the WADA investigation will just go to USAC who I can't see being too bothered in doing a full investigation into their top star. Much like Spain and Valverde
  • Pokerface
    Pokerface Posts: 7,960
    Very interesting how many of the posters with high post counts (who clearly have been around the forum for a long time and have seen all the proof, discussed this issue to death and know a LOT about pro cycling) seem to agree that Lance HAS INDEED tested positive but was just never sanctioned, while many of the noobs - just seem to go on blind faith that he is and always has been clean and this is all just a conspiracy to sully his good name.


    I guess being a long-time follower of the sport makes you a little cynical - as does being a regular on this forum!
  • cougie
    cougie Posts: 22,512
    Exactly that pokerface.

    I was sitting on my turbo cooling down in the winter with a stack of old procycling and cycle sport mags next to me. Almost without exception - all of the cover stars had tested positive, or been busted for dope.

    I'd LOVE to think that Lance was clean, and I know he's a hero to a lot of people touched by cancer - but the evidence is pretty overwhelming.

    His cancer story should still be an inspiration though - drugs cheat or not. Maybe if the rest of the field were clean - then he wouldnt have had to dope to win.
  • aarw
    aarw Posts: 448
    magicrhodes wrote:
    NO, I don't! I think Floyd Landisgrace should disappear under his rock. If you have irrefutable proof then supply it, if you don't shut the hell up!

    Comments like his just make him more of "the problem" that he was trying to stop being.

    So keep the omerta sealed tight, right? :roll:

    No doubt in my mind that Landis is a class A w@nker. Absolutely 100% confident on that one. Now he's come out with some serious alegations does that mean he should be ignored? He himself has apparently said he can't single handidly prove all of these allegations.

    To quote Kimmage: "What Landis is saying is not coming in isolation… We need people to stand up and be counted and say, ‘Yes, I was there, what Landis says is true."

    If Landis is the dirty spark that lights the fire to help irrigate the sport then so be it.
  • luckao
    luckao Posts: 632
    cougie wrote:
    I'd LOVE to think that Lance was clean, and I know he's a hero to a lot of people touched by cancer - but the evidence is pretty overwhelming.

    Agreed. At first, and as Pokerface has been talking about, I think I was quite naive in readily dismissing all assertions of his alleged cheating. My doubt has become more prominent with time. This latest chapter only reaffirms my belief that it's the sport's best/worst kept secret.
  • donrhummy
    donrhummy Posts: 2,329
    From Lance:
    You made a gift to the UCI back in the early 2000s to buy anti-doping equipment. How much was it?
    Er…Well, I can get you an exact number. Around 25,000 dollars. This was a long time ago.

    Was the payment to Verbruggen or the UCI?
    The UCI. I made it in the interests of it helping. The UCI is not a wealthy organisation.

    Did you consider it a potential conflict of interest?
    I didn’t. And if it was, we wouldn’t have done it.
  • luckao
    luckao Posts: 632
    If that isn't a conflict of interests.. my word. You don't need hindsight to realise that.
  • neilr4
    neilr4 Posts: 161
    Think of all the BIG talented amateur riders that raced with the pro's and dropped out after 1 or 2 seasons never to be heard of again! Guy's who spoke briefly about what goes on in the peleton regarding doping but didn't want to spit in the soup to spoil it for the other guy's.

    It's a hard existance as a pro rider and I think for many it's either a case of 'Dope' to earn money for the future or quit and choose another career.

    I know that if someone offered me £500,000 per year to stick a needle into my arm and it wouldn't harm me anymore than riding 2000 miles around france (but would actually help me stay healthier) I know what I would do! It's better than earning £30,000 for a company that could move to china at any time.

    I think it's easy for us to judge as we're not pro athlete's and we feel cheated that they're not sweating blood for our amusment.................................there is a difference however between doping to compete and doping to win but when somebody is all wrapped up in that 'world' where do they draw the line? Choice's have to be made and I think one day that all the top riders will be involved in some sort of scandal but they'll need the back-up that Lance has in order to survive the scandals!!

    I think 90% of the peleton dope but I don't feel cheated for it I just wish that they didn't feel that they had to!!!

    Neil.
    'REMEMBER SOME PEOPLE ARE ALIVE
    SIMPLY BECAUSE IT IS ILLEGAL TO SHOOT THEM'
  • SunWuKong
    SunWuKong Posts: 364
    Good points Neil. But this is all the more reason to fight doping hard. Landis et al can afford $90K p.a. doping and training plans etc but the young guys coming through can't, so they do it on the cheap and get it wrong, some will end up dying from heart attacks and the like because they do not have the expertise needed at hand.
  • rapid_uphill
    rapid_uphill Posts: 841
    I just hope the truth comes out in the end and we can all rest in peace.
  • iainf72
    iainf72 Posts: 15,784
    donrhummy wrote:
    From Lance:
    You made a gift to the UCI back in the early 2000s to buy anti-doping equipment. How much was it?
    Er…Well, I can get you an exact number. Around 25,000 dollars. This was a long time ago.

    Was the payment to Verbruggen or the UCI?
    The UCI. I made it in the interests of it helping. The UCI is not a wealthy organisation.

    Did you consider it a potential conflict of interest?
    I didn’t. And if it was, we wouldn’t have done it.

    From Pat

    He did acknowledge that the UCI had received money from Armstrong. “The UCI received $100,000 from Lance Armstrong in 2005, four years after this incident was supposed to have taken place.” McQuaid then explained: “The UCI would accept donations from anyone who’s prepared to give. We’re a non-profit-making organisation so we’re prepared to accept money from anyone who’s prepared to assist us in developing the sport.”

    Lesson boys : If you're going to lie, tell the same lie.
    Fckin' Quintana … that creep can roll, man.
  • neilr4
    neilr4 Posts: 161
    rapid_uphill wrote:
    I just hope the truth comes out in the end and we can all rest in peace.

    Until the next doping scandal ;-(

    Sorry for the pessimism!!!
    'REMEMBER SOME PEOPLE ARE ALIVE
    SIMPLY BECAUSE IT IS ILLEGAL TO SHOOT THEM'
  • BikingBernie
    BikingBernie Posts: 2,163
    donrhummy wrote:
    From Lance:
    You made a gift to the UCI back in the early 2000s to buy anti-doping equipment. How much was it?

    Er…Well, I can get you an exact number. Around 25,000 dollars. This was a long time ago.

    UCI president Hein Verbruggen spoke to ‘Eurosport’ and divulged that the American “gave money for the research against doping, to discover new anti-doping methods," “He gave money from his private funds, cash. He didn't want this to be known but he did it". Armstrong did not make this knowledge public and when questioned about the contribution said that “If I've donated money to the UCI to combat doping, step up controls and to fund research, it is not my job to issue a press release. That's a secret thing, because it's the right thing to do.” Eurosport.com also reports that when questioned about the amounts of money involved there followed “(Laughter) It was a fair amount. It wasn't... It wasn't a small amount of money".

    http://www.pezcyclingnews.com/?pg=fullstory&id=3088

    RULES BENT FOR TEXAN
    Lance Armstrong has not sat on
    Sunday Herald, The, Oct 12, 2008 by Jeremy Whittle

    Towards the end of his career, Armstrong made a donation to the UCI coffers, believed to be in the region of $500,000, claiming that it was to "combat doping". But former UCI committee member Sylvia Schenk said that it was "not clear what it was used for. It seemed to be a secret". A UCI spokesperson was yesterday unavailable for comment.

    http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_q ... n30900387/
  • ju5t1n
    ju5t1n Posts: 2,028
    JoeBond wrote:
    from Wikipedia: "During 2006 and 2007, Landis is believed to have raised about $1 million from the “Floyd Fairness Fund." He appealed to supporters to donate "anything they could" to help him pay his reportedly $2 million legal bill, while vigorously denying his involvement in doping."

    I was one of them
    To my mind this is a far bigger crime than the doping itself, to take money from gullible fans under false pretences is fraud on a massive scale isn’t it?
  • sherer
    sherer Posts: 2,460
    as this is America I fully expect some of these to launch a class action lawsuit against Landis
  • donrhummy
    donrhummy Posts: 2,329
    Intersting take on the question: will Floyd become the Canseco of cycling?
    http://nbcsports.msnbc.com/id/37274425/

    Canseco was widely called a liar for his book's claims and people said he was bitter and making stuff up to make money and get back at baseball for dumping him. Guess what? EVERY SINGLE CLAIM he made has been true. EVERY name of an alleged doper in his book has since been proven to have doped. It'll be interesting to see where Floyd's leads.

    One thing Floyd should be aware of: even though Canseco's been right on EVERY claim, he's still not respected, nor consulted for finding more names and he's financially ruined.
  • itisaboutthebike
    itisaboutthebike Posts: 1,120
    Well, I'm sorry but I don't believe "beating all dopers" makes you a doper. Doping doesn't turn you into a superman. It gives you an advantage, but if you don't train as hard, or aren't as good naturally, you still won't win.

    I just don't think it's right to assume he's a doper unless he gets caught. I obviously have my doubts (as I do with other riders), but until proven wrong, I think he's clean. Otherwise, I'd basically be saying "hey, that guy won the tour plenty of times, he's a doper". What's even the point in winning that way?

    Get yer heads out the clouds and smell the coffee (or caffiene). There is no human on earth who can beat someone charged on EPO, particlarly in a 3 week stage race, whose not charged themsleves.
  • itisaboutthebike
    itisaboutthebike Posts: 1,120
    The UCI stinks..............and McQuaid is covered in sh*t.
  • itisaboutthebike
    itisaboutthebike Posts: 1,120
    Isn't it interesting that the UCI doesn't want the AFLD to caryy out dope tests at the TDF ?

    I wonder why that could be ?
  • itisaboutthebike
    itisaboutthebike Posts: 1,120
    as this is America I fully expect some of these to launch a class action lawsuit against Landis

    Interestingly AL isn't going to sue Landis - I wonder why ? I for one would like to get me hands on the Landis trianing diaries. Isn't there a test that can determine the age of ink.............
  • ms_tree
    ms_tree Posts: 1,405
    I don't like TheTwit but I don't like Landis either - he's smug and he's got a weak chin.
    'Google can bring back a hundred thousand answers. A librarian can bring you back the right one.'
    Neil Gaiman
  • itisaboutthebike
    itisaboutthebike Posts: 1,120
    One thing Floyd should be aware of: even though Canseco's been right on EVERY claim, he's still not respected, nor consulted for finding more names and he's financially ruined.

    I don't think Flandis gives a flying fook anyway.....................
  • Mothyman
    Mothyman Posts: 655
    ...I am new to following pro cycling...but I get the impression we all assume a decent number of cyclists are using something and yet we all continue to watch the races enthusiastically..... I am struggling to get into it because every race seems tainted.....

Categories