# Landis is starting to act more guilty



## slamy (Mar 15, 2004)

It appears the UCI has now ordered the B sample to be tested and Landis has not asked that yet. I understand he is trying to assemble his defense, but if I had done nothing and had nothing to fear in terms of artificial steriods, why would I delay this? He also didn't appear on the Today show like he was supposed too. If this were me and I knew 100% that I didn't do anything wrong, then I would want to see the results of the B sample ASAP then work from there. Unless I knew what the results were going to be (which is, it will be bad). Then I would delay it so I could get all my ducks in a row for my defense. I really pray that he is innocent. But the more I read and the longer this goes, the worse it is looking.

http://sports.yahoo.com/sc/news;_yl...g=afp-cyclingfratourdoping&prov=afp&type=lgns


----------



## SlowBikeRacer (Nov 7, 2005)

*Snails Pace...*



> ... the result would not be known for several weeks as the laboratory shuts for the holidays at week's end.


Got to love working in Europe! Either on Holiday or an Strike...

No Mention of the Spanish riders being dropped from the Operation Funentes on the Yahoo Cycling site. But of course big mouth Lemon is up.

"If it ain't scandel, then don't print it..."


----------



## desmo13 (Jun 28, 2006)

Of course he is in no hurry for the "B" sample. same urine, same day. he has to plan all along that they will be same, and find out why and how he can prove it was not from doping.
that doesnt sound guilty, that sounds smart.

about the today show, late flight? any number of things.

I do not the think the events of the day lean one way or other regarding his guilt.


----------



## iliveonnitro (Feb 19, 2006)

Read what snapdragen posted in another thread here...

http://www.dailypeloton.com/displayarticle.asp?pk=9843


----------



## brianmcg (Oct 12, 2002)

I thought the testing of the B sample was SOP if the A sample came up positive. When did it change that the B sample had to be demanded to be tested?

The B sample was supposed to be tested before any results were announced. Go figure.


----------



## EasyRider47 (Sep 18, 2005)

Removed


----------



## snapdragen (Jan 28, 2004)

Some of you guys would not be happy, no matter what FL does. If he talks about the test, it's spin control so he must be guilty. If he keeps his mouth shut, well, he's not talking so he must be guilty. None of us know what he's going through right now; personally, if my livelihood were in jeopardy, I'd be scared to death.


----------



## EasyRider47 (Sep 18, 2005)

Removed


----------



## asgelle (Apr 21, 2003)

slamy said:


> It appears the UCI has now ordered the B sample to be tested and Landis has not asked that yet. I understand he is trying to assemble his defense, but if I had done nothing and had nothing to fear in terms of artificial steriods, why would I delay this? He also didn't appear on the Today show like he was supposed too. If this were me and I knew 100% that I didn't do anything wrong, then I would want to see the results of the B sample ASAP then work from there. Unless I knew what the results were going to be (which is, it will be bad). Then I would delay it so I could get all my ducks in a row for my defense. I really pray that he is innocent. But the more I read and the longer this goes, the worse it is looking.
> 
> http://sports.yahoo.com/sc/news;_yl...g=afp-cyclingfratourdoping&prov=afp&type=lgns


Really? Because it it were me and I knew I didn't do anything wrong and an A sample came back positive, then I would know the test is faulty and unreliable. But being a bike rider not a biochemist or endocrinologist, I wouldn't be able to explain it and the last thing I would want would be a repeat of this known faulty test. I would want to assemble a team of experts and give them as much time as possible to challenge the test. After all, the testing labs have had experts working on the test for years and they know all the weaknesses and loopholes (and every lab procedure has them) so I'm already at a huge disadvantage. I have a few days or weeks to discover the reason for the error (which in your hypothetical must exist) even though the lab with experts working for years hasn't discovered it. So really Landis's behavior doesn't show guilt or innocence except as people apply their prejudice to jump to unfounded conclusions.


----------



## asgelle (Apr 21, 2003)

EasyRider47 said:


> UCI can proceed with B sample testing, even if Rider waives the necessity of it.


But can they go ahead and schedule it? As I recall the UCI allows the rider and his representative to be present before and during the testing of the B sample to insure that the sample hasn't been tampered with and all testing protocols are followed. If the B sample were tested without Landis and his representatives present, I'm pretty sure that would void the result.


----------



## mohair_chair (Oct 3, 2002)

There are two very good reasons for postponing testing the B sample as long as possible.

First, the B sample will be tested by the same lab that tested the A sample. That doesn't seem right to me, because if they screwed it up once, it's likely they'll screw it up again. Hopefully, Landis can get it sent to another UCI approved lab in another country, because once the sample is gone, it's gone. There is no C sample.

Second, as soon as he asks for the B sample test and the results come back, if they are also negative, the door slams shut. Even if he knows the results will come back the same, it makes sense to postpone it, because once it comes back, a lot of procedures start that involve the team firing him, the victory being stripped, sanctions being imposed, etc. He is declared guilty in the eyes of cycling. If he isn't guilty, he needs to postpone that as long as possible to help in his defense.

Just remember that Landis doesn't care what you think. He's fighting for his life, his career, and his reputation. If he is innocent, he still has a huge uphill battle to deal with and he doesn't need to waste time, energy, or money appeasing the masses.


----------



## desmo13 (Jun 28, 2006)

EasyRider47 said:


> Check the Larry King interview - he said that they would be filing notice to proceed with the B sample immediately that evening.
> 
> KING: Now there is - what about the second test. Are you taking them yet or awaiting results or what?
> 
> ...


I guess it is up to perception?


----------



## pibber (Feb 13, 2006)

Looks like Floyd has requested it, at least according to ESPN.com:

http://sports.espn.go.com/oly/cycling/news/story?id=2535480


----------



## bahueh (May 11, 2004)

*and on Velonews and MSNBC...*



pibber said:


> Looks like Floyd has requested it, at least according to ESPN.com:
> 
> http://sports.espn.go.com/oly/cycling/news/story?id=2535480



people are so damn impatient on this site...relax..these things have time committments, as most things in life. 
fact is, if the test was within its probability of accuracy, the B test will be positive also unless it tests out within the compliment probability (unlikely). Then its up to a defense team to provide additional physiological proof that he has this claimed "natural occurence" of test/epi ratio. Expect no fast results folks, but velonews.com is reporting he will keep the TDF crown until such time that all arbitration is complete...so put away your party hats, its gonna be awhile.


----------



## almccm (May 3, 2003)

I agree with you. People are challenging everything. He couldn't possibly drink while racing! No one could race and eat in-n-out! Yet some of these same people probably belong to the crowd that says Babe Ruth hit his homers while eating hot dogs and drinking beer.

I've seen a lot of Floyd's recent interviews and I don't see him making excuses. He doesn't understand how the test turned out like it did but he offers no explanation. He believes further testing will clear him. As far as I'm concerned he is talking like an innocent man. I don't understand the rush to brand him a doper.


----------



## cdaddy (Jun 27, 2006)

*Did I miss something*

I know it's an editorial, but you'd think the Associated Press would at least wait until the "official" verdict before publishing such a damning piece. Hey Mr. Litke, Landis has been found guilty of exactly NOTHING up to this point. Is it too much to ask that you mention that little tidbit before crucifying the guy. 
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14118106/from/RS.3/


----------



## almccm (May 3, 2003)

It's not as good a story if it's presented fairly. I wrote a fairly nasty rebuttal to a sports columnist's opinion piece on the front page of the San Jose Mercury News. He condemned both Floyd and cycling on Friday. I still don't believe enough information has been released go condemn anyone. Even if both samples come back positive I believe the whole appeals process still has to be followed. Now all you haters can jump in and say how Tyler broke your heart. Boo Hoo.


----------



## JohnHemlock (Jul 15, 2006)

mohair_chair said:


> There are two very good reasons for postponing testing the B sample as long as possible.
> 
> First, the B sample will be tested by the same lab that tested the A sample. That doesn't seem right to me, because if they screwed it up once, it's likely they'll screw it up again. Hopefully, Landis can get it sent to another UCI approved lab in another country, because once the sample is gone, it's gone. There is no C sample.
> 
> ...


Perfect post. I agree, he has more important things to worry about that whether or not he looks good in the eyes of Joe and Jane Punchclock.


----------



## djg714 (Oct 24, 2005)

JohnHemlock said:


> Perfect post. I agree, he has more important things to worry about that whether or not he looks good in the eyes of Joe and Jane Punchclock.



Lance and his people are on the driver seat now. What a farce. He should come out and say he put the patch up his a$$ and suck up the punishment. Some people here wouldn't believe it...............:mad2:


----------



## almccm (May 3, 2003)

I think you misstated this a bit. I believe that all the Floyd supporters would believe him if he came out and said he did it. The point is we believe Floyd.

However, I believe that many of the Floyd bashers will insist that he is guilty even if the B sample does not confirm the A sample. If the B sample does confirm the A sample then an even greater number of the Floyd bashers will insist he is guilty even if follow up medical testing clears him.

The irrational people are not the ones that are supporting Floyd, they are the ones that have comdemned him on the basis on one ratio and some leaks.


----------



## Spunout (Aug 12, 2002)

Proof. There cannot be a discussion about doping without mentionning L*nce. This thread was doing okay for awhile.


----------



## stevesbike (Jun 3, 2002)

I get the sense that most people on this forum hope Landis is cleared, but 1) the reality is almost no B sample tests contradict the A sample-the head of the UCLA lab --who tests 40,000 samples a year said he remembers only one case of B samples not confirming A results, and it was due to a fungus growing in the B sample. 2) Landis' lawyers have publicly stated they expect the B sample to come back positive. 3) The reports of exogenous source as the result of an IRMS test is highly likely due to a credible source and experts who report that no positive A sample result would have been announced in the absence of a positive IRMS test. 

If that's the case, then, again, experts report that it is exceedingly difficult to overturn an exogenous source finding, so being realistic means preparing for a long appeal process that probably isn't going to turn out well for Landis.


----------



## zero85ZEN (Oct 11, 2002)

*Painting with a broad brush*



almccm said:


> However, I believe that many of the Floyd bashers will insist that he is guilty even if the B sample does not confirm the A sample. If the B sample does confirm the A sample then an even greater number of the Floyd bashers will insist he is guilty even if follow up medical testing clears him.
> 
> The irrational people are not the ones that are supporting Floyd, they are the ones that have comdemned him on the basis on one ratio and some leaks.



You are making some pretty sweeping statements in your post. I don't consider myself an irrational person and I'm not condemning or supporting Floyd. I'm waiting to see the results of the B sample and the full disclosure of the testing proceedures that were applied to his samples. However, I have to say that the information that is being released either via official channels or leaked, and based on some of the actions and statements that I've witnessed from Floyd himself, makes me increasingly skeptical that there is going to be a happy ending to this affair. I wanted Floyd to win the Tour. I watched him crack in stage 16 and felt let down. I watched his stage 17 comeback with awe and cheered his win in Paris. But I won't let emotions get in the way of my rational examination of the facts as I know them. 

Sad to say it really doesn't look good for Landis at this point. I sure hope he proves all the skeptics, myself included, and bashers wrong with the result of the B sample.


----------



## snowman3 (Jul 20, 2002)

mohair_chair said:


> There are two very good reasons for postponing testing the B sample as long as possible.
> 
> First, the B sample will be tested by the same lab that tested the A sample. That doesn't seem right to me, because if they screwed it up once, it's likely they'll screw it up again. Hopefully, Landis can get it sent to another UCI approved lab in another country, because once the sample is gone, it's gone. There is no C sample.
> 
> ...


Yep, what Mo said. There isn't much advantage for Floyd to expedite the B sample. You've got to expect the B sample will return the same result, so he's got to be thinking ahead and planning his defense assuming A=B.


----------



## Art853 (May 30, 2003)

slamy said:


> It appears the UCI has now ordered the B sample to be tested and Landis has not asked that yet.


How did you get that statement from the article? The article said both that the UCI requested the test AND that "Floyd did request the B sample test." 

Somehow you only received the first statement. Perhaps it is an issue of the headline dominating the content of the article or some type of selective understanding.

The source of the article is Agence France-Presse (AFP).
The Associated Press (via NYT website) reported on July 31st "Floyd Landis officially requested the testing of his backup urine sample Monday." 
The New York Times reported on July 29 that Landis requested the second test "last night."

It's interesting to see how this event is being covered in the media and people's reactions to it.


----------



## almccm (May 3, 2003)

Not painting with a broad brush at all. I am stating that, in my opinion, it is rational to wait until all the evidence is in and presented then that, along with the accused's testimony, is what is used to make a judgement. I am stating that it is irrational to comdemn a man because some source somewhere said he probably did something that was illegal, immoral or fattening. We have a few facts and a lot of speculation.

By the way, reading your posts I would never have guessed that you're waiting for more evidence.


----------



## zero85ZEN (Oct 11, 2002)

*Really?*



almccm said:


> By the way, reading your posts I would never have guessed that you're waiting for more evidence.


Show me where I've said he's guilty.


----------



## zero85ZEN (Oct 11, 2002)

Art853 said:


> It's interesting to see how this event is being covered in the media and people's reactions to it.


VERY interesting!


----------



## slamy (Mar 15, 2004)

Look, I want Landis to be found innocent as bad as anyone. I was home watching on the day he cracked waiting on a new washer and dryer. I was upset all night when he lost his lead. The next day I came home from work early when he took a 9 minute lead on the famous stage 17. To me this whole case is determined by one thing. Is there a synthetic form of steriods in his sample: plain and simple. If it is present, thats it! It doesn't matter if he drank a keg of beer and had sex with all the podium girls. If there is synthetic steriods in his system as the french paper says there is, then it's game, set, match. If there is no synthetic steriod in him, then I know he's 100% innocent no matter what they say his ratio's are.


----------



## Live Steam (Feb 4, 2004)

How do we know where the 'extra' testosterone came from? The lab or another outside entity could have tainted the sample. A lot of faith has to be placed with the lab and those that handle the samples. I believe this episode along with OP investigation will prompt the riders to unite further and demand better representation in the pro tour circuit. I feel the sport aside from the racers, is somewhat corrupt and devoid of ethics. The association of L'Equipe and the lab goes to that point. Something's rotten in Denmark, France, where ever!


----------



## desmo13 (Jun 28, 2006)

This is going to go down in history, along with the 3rd shooter behind the grassy knoll, area 51, mary magdelene, the knights that say neigh...

The foundations for conspiracy theory have already been layed out by the Lab, McQuaid(UCI) and L'Equipe.


----------



## Alpedhuez55 (Jun 29, 2005)

desmo13 said:



> This is going to go down in history, along with the 3rd shooter behind the grassy knoll, area 51, mary magdelene, the knights that say neigh...
> 
> The foundations for conspiracy theory have already been layed out by the Lab, McQuaid(UCI) and L'Equipe.


Please, haven't you been reading any of the posts today? The conspiracy goes Lemond, Lab, McQuaid(UCI) and L'Equipe  

It is not looking good for Floyd right now. If these reports are correct, I guess he has to hope the other sample comes back with a different result, rather than the same one, which he is claiming it will come back with. Or that the lab screws up the B Sample.


----------



## desmo13 (Jun 28, 2006)

Ahh, Lemond is the leak inside the Lab, he reports directly to L'Equipe! well, his name is french...and he seems to know everything before anyone else does..Now, if we can just get phone cam shot of him squeezing some testosterone into vial number #54376.......


----------



## almccm (May 3, 2003)

I looked at a few of your post and must admit they are not really negative.

You did respond to one of my responses with this:

"Yeah, what's the use of science when you live in a world of conspiracy theories and superhumanly honest former mennonites."

I will admit that is a fair response. However, I'm not proposing conspiracy theories nor am I rejecting science. This is not a black and white case. There are too many ways that testosterone could have gotten into Floyd's body. It's not like this is blood doping where you know when you receive a transfusion. 

Before the tour began I was hoping that Basso would do the double but I wouldn't have been disappointed if Landis won. When Basso was pulled from the race I thought he, and everyone else that was pulled were being screwed. They were pulled for suspicion and since that time many of the riders have been cleared and more still may be cleared. I now believe Floyd has been tried and convicted even before any evidence was officially presented. I think he deserves better.


----------



## Sub (Feb 13, 2004)

I don't get why they even do the ratio test. Why not just do the IRMS test and be done with it. I don't buy into conspiracies, sorry. If that test comes back positive, it is over. I'm 100% behind Floyd and I will be crushed if this happens, but it is not looking good for him at this point.


----------



## mtbcraig (Jul 28, 2006)

*podium girls? positive*



slamy said:


> Look, I want Landis to be found innocent as bad as anyone. It doesn't matter if he drank a keg of beer and had sex with all the podium girls. If there is synthetic steriods in his system as the french paper says there is, then it's game, set, match. If there is no synthetic steriod in him,.


Why you gotta throw the podium girls under the bus? Maybe the "french paper" should get thrown under the bus!


Craig


----------

