Landis tests positive for drugs

[gauchogolfer]

So is the sport now...

Cycling will have to recover somehow.

Looks like I'll have to get back on my bike and get in shape, since there might be a spot for 'me' on a team this time next year.

"Coming out of nowhere, it's a Cinderella story, this unknown rider, fat and out of shape only a year ago, he's now the only clean rider willing to take a three week vacation in July to kill himself on a bike in the Alps and Pyrenees. He's set the record for slowest tour, coming in 1 hour behind the previous mark set in 1922. Ladies and gentlemen, here's your winner of the maillot jaune, gauchogolfer!"

I can't wait to drink my champagne on the Champs Elysees in a year

 

[MacsRgr8]

I'll be there to cheer you on!

 

[gauchogolfer]

I'll be there to cheer you on!

You may even be in the peloton with me

 

[Lord Blackadder]

It's terribly dissappointing for me...All the tour riders in the last few years that I've rooted for are almost certainly doping, save Lance (I still belive that he's clean, though that is increasingly becoming a stance considered naive).

This doesn't ruin the spectacle of cycling and the Tour for me but I no longer have much hope that we can keep perfromance-enhancing drugs out of sports. Un-enhanced athletes are no longer capable (or at least to not feel capable) of competing against those who dope.

 

[QCassidy352]

It's terribly dissappointing for me...All the tour riders in the last few years that I've rooted for are almost certainly doping, save Lance (I still belive that he's clean, though that is increasingly becoming a stance considered naive).

Not to make this about Lance, because that debate could go on forever and will never be proven either way, but he can't possibly have been clean. I simply don't believe he's so much better that he can not only beat the entire world, but do it while they're juiced to the gills and he's clean.

I once read a really fascinating article by an amatuer cyclist who started taking a lot of performance enhancing drugs, legally, at his own expense, just because he wanted to see how much they really did. He said it was amazing; he never got tired, felt like he was invincible and could ride forever. His riding buddies noticed immediately, and he had to stop himself from winning races (because he wasn't out to get anything he didn't deserve). In short, drugs provide a very significant advantage, and I just can't believe that anyone clean could have dominated a world full of dirty athletes like Lance did.

Anyway, with respect to Landis, why do these guys bother lying? He had to know the test was going to show it wasn't natural testosterone. Just once I'd like to see one of these guys stand up and say, "Yes, I did it. I took drugs because it was the only way to compete at this level, and you caught me. I'm sorry I had to take them, but I'm not really sorry that I did it because I couldn't be a professional in this sport without them. Now I'll just accept my punishment because I cheated, and everyone knows it, so I'm not going to insult the sport and the fans further by denying it." I mean, do they think they're fooling anyone with these denials after the tests come back positive?

 

[Don't panic]

Not to make this about Lance, because that debate could go on forever and will never be proven either way, but he can't possibly have been clean. I simply don't believe he's so much better that he can not only beat the entire world, but do it while they're juiced to the gills and he's clean.

I once read a really fascinating article by an amatuer cyclist who started taking a lot of performance enhancing drugs, legally, at his own expense, just because he wanted to see how much they really did. He said it was amazing; he never got tired, felt like he was invincible and could ride forever. His riding buddies noticed immediately, and he had to stop himself from winning races (because he wasn't out to get anything he didn't deserve). In short, drugs provide a very significant advantage, and I just can't believe that anyone clean could have dominated a world full of dirty athletes like Lance did.

Anyway, with respect to Landis, why do these guys bother lying? He had to know the test was going to show it wasn't natural testosterone. Just once I'd like to see one of these guys stand up and say, "Yes, I did it. I took drugs because it was the only way to compete at this level, and you caught me. I'm sorry I had to take them, but I'm not really sorry that I did it because I couldn't be a professional in this sport without them. Now I'll just accept my punishment because I cheated, and everyone knows it, so I'm not going to insult the sport and the fans further by denying it." I mean, do they think they're fooling anyone with these denials after the tests come back positive?

good post.
i think you have some very valid points.
but as far as why they don't come clean, i think in part because by stubbornly denying that they ever did anything inappropriate they can still mantain the benefit of the doubt in a large part of their fans and the general public.
many people will believe them because they want it to be true.

If let's say Armstrong was to come out tomorrow and say "it's true. i did it, just like everyone else", his legacy, lengendary status and economic empire (he is still worth millions today) would dissolve, and even if in my opinion his sport accomplishments would reamin equally valid (and i would respect him more as a person), he would go in the eyes of most from being one of the best athletes ever to the greatest cheat in sports history, especially in the US.


one thing is to 'know', another is to know.

 

[groovebuster]

Not to make this about Lance, because that debate could go on forever and will never be proven either way, but he can't possibly have been clean.

One of his A-Probe of last years Tour de France was tested positive, but the B-Probe could not be found anymore, that's why he didn't lose his title. So practically it was proven that he was doped, but because of the missing B-Probe it didn't have any consequences for him...

groovebuster

 

[Le Big Mac]

One of his A-Probe of last years Tour de France was tested positive, but the B-Probe could not be found anymore, that's why he didn't lose his title. So practically it was proven that he was doped, but because of the missing B-Probe it didn't have any consequences for him...

groovebuster

The test was for a sample in 1999 or 2000 (I forget). The lack of the B sample tells you how careful the lab probably was with the A sample. I'm all for drug testing, but doing a test six years later without following the proper protocols is closer to mudraking than legitimate testing.

 

[Le Big Mac]

Anyway, with respect to Landis, why do these guys bother lying? He had to know the test was going to show it wasn't natural testosterone. Just once I'd like to see one of these guys stand up and say, "Yes, I did it. I took drugs because it was the only way to compete at this level, and you caught me. I'm sorry I had to take them, but I'm not really sorry that I did it because I couldn't be a professional in this sport without them. Now I'll just accept my punishment because I cheated, and everyone knows it, so I'm not going to insult the sport and the fans further by denying it." I mean, do they think they're fooling anyone with these denials after the tests come back positive?

I really wonder whether Landis (and others) tell the trainer when they get back to the room/hotel "Man, that was a terrible day. Can you get me fixed for tomorrow?" And the trainer pulls out the testo-gel and puts it on, but Landis is thinking he's getting a massage.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying someone like Bonds does this--he clearly had a plan of action. But Landis didn't test positive any other day of the tour. One has to wonder whether someone screwed up and put the stuff in him without his knowledge.

 

[QCassidy352]

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying someone like Bonds does this--he clearly had a plan of action. But Landis didn't test positive any other day of the tour. One has to wonder whether someone screwed up and put the stuff in him without his knowledge.

I can't see that happening. An elite athlete is going to know what's going in to his own body. A trainer who did that would be thrown out of the sport, disgraced, and liable for criminal penalties for assault and battery (and who knows what else). All for what? To be known as the trainer of the Tour de France winner? Hell of a risk. Not to mention that (I assume) these trainers feel loyalty towards and affection for the athletes they work with.

Sure, it's possible, but Occam's razor comes to mind. What's the least complicated yet complete explanation here? That the athlete who had the drugs in his system and benefitted the most therefrom is the one who put those drugs in his system.

but as far as why they don't come clean, i think in part because by stubbornly denying that they ever did anything inappropriate they can still mantain the benefit of the doubt in a large part of their fans and the general public.
many people will believe them because they want it to be true.

I think you are right. Certainly, a guy like Lance (or Mark McGwire in baseball) who has never actually been caught can deny it, and has a great deal to lose by admitting it. But guys like Landis or Gatlin should really just own up. I guess even for them there's some slight doubt created by the denials... but I for one would have a lot more respect for them if they just 'fessed up.

And btw, I agree about Lance. I do think he was on drugs, but I still have a great deal of respect for his achievements because so many people were probably cheating that the playing field was more or less even again, and he kept coming out on top. He won with them all doped, and he would have won if they were all clean. But I just can't believe that he beat that many dirty athletes that soundly while clean.

 

[Mitthrawnuruodo]

One of his A-Probe of last years Tour de France was tested positive, but the B-Probe could not be found anymore, that's why he didn't lose his title. So practically it was proven that he was doped, but because of the missing B-Probe it didn't have any consequences for him...

That wasn't Lance, but Tyler Hamilton, in the 2004 Olympics. The irony being that after being cleared and getting to keep his olympic gold, because the B sample was messed up (this is the first known case where an athlete is cleared because the A and B sample was different, as far as I can remember, regardless of sport), he was busted for the same thing during the Vuelta just a few months later and is now suspended/excluded. Both times it was blood doping.

Just another little trivia note: Tyler Hamilton was cycling for Phonak when he was caught...

 

[Lord Blackadder]

many people will believe them because they want it to be true.

I think we all want Lance to be clean in the sense that we all hope (in some small corner of our cynical minds) that clean athletes can still win... and I'm not so cynical yet that I believe otherwise, even though the evidence mounts.

Regardless of the outcome, I hope the Landis doping accusations are addressed soon in a manner that makes it clear whether he is clean or not. I just don't want this to drag on. We know that most top riders are doping, maybe the next Tour will be full of amateurs like others have half-jokingly suggested, due to mass-bannings.

Or maybe they'll create an "enhanced" category that allows doping but saddles riders with a substantial handicap, while the "clean" riders have to undergo three times the tests to ensure they are clean. Just kidding.

 

[Play Ultimate]

Lance clean?

The two things that keeps coming back to me regarding Lance are
1) due to muscle atrophy during his cancer bought, he was able to recreate his body to be a bike rider, nothing else. He didn't rock climb, row, swim, etc. in order to keep his upper body muscles at a minimum.
2) Pain tolerance. I remember listening to an interview with a Tour de France rider when he was asked when the pain goes away when you ride. His answer was that it never goes away; you just go faster. Lance going through chemo must have endured alot of pain. Thus the pain experienced while on the bike is tolerable.
SO personally I don't find it that hard to believe that he is clean. Besides, at this level, much of it is mental toughness and Armstrong had that hands down.

 

[QCassidy352]

(this is the first known case where an athlete is cleared because the A and B sample was different, as far as I can remember, regardless of sport)

Nope. Bernard Lagat, kenyan-born and now a U.S. citizen. Silver at the 1500m in Athens, bronze in Sydney. His "A" sample came back positive for EPO in 2003, but his "B" sample came back negative.

A lot of people will never believe that he was/is clean, and say that his positive was covered up because he's one of track's biggest stars. As Steve Scott (American record holder in the 1 mile) put it to me when I said that Lagat's B sample had come back clean, "but then you have to wonder, why is he the only one whose sample they made a mistake on?"

Not that anyone cares about track.

SO personally I don't find it that hard to believe that he is clean. Besides, at this level, much of it is mental toughness and Armstrong had that hands down.

I really wish I could find that article by the cyclist describing what it's like to be on drugs. Compared to a normal person, it's like being superman.

As I said, no one will ever be able to prove anything about Lance, and certainly everyone would love to believe in him as a shining beacon of a clean athlete beating the dirty ones. But I've seen it too many times in track and baseball (which are two of my passions; I'm not nearly as knowledgable about cycling as some of you): When an athlete is that dominant, especially in the face of their competitors cheating, it nearly always eventually comes out that they were cheating as well.

 

[Mitthrawnuruodo]

Nope. Bernard Lagat, kenyan-born and now a U.S. citizen. Silver at the 1500m in Athens, bronze in Sydney. His "A" sample came back positive for EPO in 2003, but his "B" sample came back negative.

I stand corrected... I blame the fact that I've never even heard of Berard Lagat (until now)...

Still not a very common occurrence, though... and the rest stands, right...?

 

[Le Big Mac]

That wasn't Lance, but Tyler Hamilton, in the 2004 Olympics. The irony being that after being cleared and getting to keep his olympic gold, because the B sample was messed up (this is the first known case where an athlete is cleared because the A and B sample was different, as far as I can remember, regardless of sport), he was busted for the same thing during the Vuelta just a few months later and is now suspended/excluded. Both times it was blood doping.

Just another little trivia note: Tyler Hamilton was cycling for Phonak when he was caught...

It's a stretch to say the samples were "different". Someone in the lab screwed up and made the B sample untestable. Since Tyler tested positive again a couple months later, it's probably fair to assume he should have lost his Gold medal.

BTW, did we ever get an explanation for why he had dual blood? I kind of assume that someone screwed up and gave him the wrong bag of blood. He meant to reinject his own, but got someone else's.

 

[Lord Blackadder]

It's a stretch to say the samples were "different". Someone in the lab screwed up and made the B sample untestable. Since Tyler tested positive again a couple months later, it's probably fair to assume he should have lost his Gold medal.

From a logical standpoint, it's equally possible that an A sample could be mishandled in such a way that it produces a false positive. In Hamilton's case we have (in retrospect) strong circumstantial evidence against him being clean at the time, but in Landis' case (as far as I know) he doesn't have a history of doping.

Maybe they should go triple-redundant and take a third sample to make it harder for false positive or tampering to affect the process...

 

[Phatpat]

Maybe they should go triple-redundant and take a third sample to make it harder for false positive or tampering to affect the process...

The thing the cycling world is trying to figure out: is it better to have too many false-positives, or too many false-negatives.

Operation Puerto seems like the later, seeing as the Astana Wurth guys were excluded from the Tour but later exonerated.

 

[iGary]

When are the results expected?

 

[Don't panic]

The thing the cycling world is trying to figure out: is it better to have too many false-positives, or too many false-negatives.

Operation Puerto seems like the later, seeing as the Astana Wurth guys were excluded from the Tour but later exonerated.

so that would make it false-positives.
what i find a little bizarre in the Landis debacle, is that no one has spent a word in defense of ullrich or basso (or some the others), who have not failed any test, but have been 'deprived' of an almost certain win at the TDF based on suspicions alone. six weeks later, still there is absolutely zero evidence shown against them. I am not saying they are clean, just that everyone assumes they aren't and that this TDF was 'clean' because one doctor's office was raided instead of another's.
I am ok with suspending them, but then they should be charged with something immediately, and not let in limbo for months.

iGary,
the B sample's results should be made public on saturday. I have to say that at this point there is little doubt (at least IMO) about the outcome.

 

[MacsRgr8]

the B sample's results should be made public on saturday. I have to say that at this point there is little doubt (at least IMO) about the outcome.

What if the outcome doesn't prove him guilty....?

If that were the case, I just simply wouldn't believe it.

There also was this Dutch rider who retired a couple of years ago (can't remember which one it was), and when he was interviewed they asked him if he had ever used drugs. His reply was plain and simple: "Yes, we all did"...

He was forced to take that back though... but it does make you wonder. I don't think anybody is so naive anymore as to think no professional riders use some sort of drug. And same goes to track events, and swimming, and football....

EDIT:
It was Peter Winnen. He wanted to write a autobiography. He told people that he would mention the fact that drugs were used. Once other riders heard of this they came up to Peter asking if they were going to be mentioned.... He had no intent (so he said) of actually accusing his ex-collegaues, but the fact that many riders were frightened said enough, IMHO...
For the people who can read Dutch: http://www.coenverbraak.nl/winnen.htm

 

[dejo]

And the trainer pulls out the testo-gel and puts it on, but Landis is thinking he's getting a massage.

A one-time use of testosterone is not going to make a difference. It takes weeks of use prior to the race to take effect. And according to this Bloomberg story, Landis "passed tests on six other occasions during the three-week event".

 

[jaxstate]

It's being leaked that they has found large traces of synthetic testosterone. If this is true, then it's a no brainer.

A one-time use of testosterone is not going to make a difference. It takes weeks of use prior to the race to take effect. And according to this Bloomberg story, Landis "passed tests on six other occasions during the three-week event".

 

[gauchogolfer]

It's being leaked that they has found large traces of synthetic testosterone. If this is true, then it's a no brainer.

It still doesn't answer how he could have passed the other tests earlier (and later) in the tour. It doesn't make sense that he would only fail this one test (and fail it so spectacularly).

 

[jaxstate]

ooooh. I see what your saying. It is odd that only this one came up positive.

It still doesn't answer how he could have passed the other tests earlier (and later) in the tour. It doesn't make sense that he would only fail this one test (and fail it so spectacularly).