# Le Tour de France



## Paul Chapman (30 Jun 2006)

In case anyone is interested, the Tour de France cycle race starts tomorrow - well, you might be getting fed up with the football by now :roll: 

Unfortunately it's been hit again with a drugs scandal, with the two favourites, Ullrich and Basso, being suspended - there's plenty about this on the BBC sport website if you want to read more. Great pity they haven't been able to nail the drugs problem in cycling, because it really sours one of the year's greatest sporting spectacles  

Paul


----------



## Shady (30 Jun 2006)

Crikey - wouldn't have thought it of Ulrich...


----------



## Paul Chapman (30 Jun 2006)

Well he's been desperate to win it for a few years. Hope it proves negative but I doubt that they would have suspended him unless they were pretty sure. All very silly because it can kill you - remember Tom Simpson? At least in Tom's days they didn't fully appreciate the dire health consequences.

Paul


----------



## johnelliott (30 Jun 2006)

Perhaps it would be better if they just let these people take whatever drugs they like, it's been obvious for years that at the highest levels of athletics that virtual all the competitors are drug enhanced. It's just some are better at hiding it than others, or that they are able to get stuff that is to new to be picked up by tests.

john


----------



## Noel (30 Jun 2006)

As I see it Ivan Basso and Jan Ullrich were guilty by association at this stage as a result of the ongoing Spanish drugs enquiry. It wasn't a case of positive specimens.
I see the Astana-Wurth's entry had been suspended because there were rumours of drug enhancement. They got back in on appeal. 
Wonder if the Basso / Urlich suspension was timed so there was no possibility of appeal.
I don't think all of this is going to put a dampener on the actual race, actually leaves it more open. The prologue will be interesting if only for the re-habilitation of David Millar who races again after his 2 year drugs ban. The man doesn't need drugs, best cyclist to come out of the UK for many a long year (at least since his namesake Robert). Don't think Wiggins will do that well, not this year any way.
Sadly there's nobody from this side of the Irish sea to replace Roche or Kelly.
Poor Tommy Simpson, amphetamines hastened his callapse and later death whilst climbing Mt Ventoux.
Reckon it will be an American or Austrailan victory this year. Looking foward to listening to Phil and team again.

Noel, who has a passing interest in the TDF.


----------



## Paul Chapman (30 Jun 2006)

Noel":rjcgrn25 said:


> Sadly there's nobody from this side of the Irish sea to replace Roche or Kelly.



That victory by Stephen Roche in 1987 was brilliant - he put in some blistering performances in the mountains. When I think back to some of the great rides of all time I think Stephen's performance in that Tour is up there with the best of them :wink: 

Paul


----------



## wrightclan (30 Jun 2006)

Sad to hear about Ulrich and Basso. I was looking forward to a showdown between the two, after Basso trounced everyone in the Giro, and Ulrich was on the rise toward the end of the Giro, then went on to win the Tour de Suisse.

I'm not as surprised as Shady about Ulrich. I know it's stereotyping, but Ulrich does come out of the pre-unification East German sports system. It's no secret that they weren't above using questionable performance enhancements. He was quite young at the time of unification, but had spent a number of years as a youngster in that system.

On the other hand, I'm not as cynical as johnelliott. I don't think they're all at it. Though it's getting harder to stave off that level of cynicism every day.  

As far as Noel's comments about an American or Australian victory; I can't think of any Aussies up for the podium except in the sprints competition. Correct me, if I'm forgetting someone. If Ulrich or Basso were in it, I couldn't see an American getting the victory. I can think of a few who will likely be in the top ten. But their absence blows it wide open for a number of riders. Americans include Landis, Leipheimer, Julich, and Hincapie. Others might be Valverde (Spain), Mayo (Spain), Cunego (Italy), Salvodelli, (Italy), Simoni (Italy).

I was in a few races with Millar in the early '90's when he was about 14. He was phenomenal even at such a young age. Hard to say, how he'll fare after a two year lay-off.

Looking forward to the best sporting event in the world, just not as much as I was yesterday. :-k 

Brad


----------



## Noel (1 Jul 2006)

Hey Brad, good insight. Australian wise I was thinking of Cadel Evans, maybe not a win but hopefully on the podium. You're right about Alejandro Valverde, great future ahead of him.
Since the days of Roche, Kelly, Robert Millar, etc it's difficult to keep up with the newer riders.
The likes of the most spectacular and maddest sprinter ever, Abdoujaparov (was it he that crashed into the Gendarme who was taking a picture, on the last stage in Paris) all elbows, Hinault, Van Poppel, Fignon, Jalabert and Virenque etc.
As Paul mentioned Roche catching Delgado (I think) on one of the climbs, collapsing and needing oxygen and Phil Liggett and Paul Sherwen going hoarse.
Anyway, looking forward to the race and the drama.

Noel.


----------



## neilc (1 Jul 2006)

Noel":48236mqi said:


> Sadly there's nobody from this side of the Irish sea to replace Roche or Kelly.



What about Mark Scanlon from my home town of Sligo. Give him another couple of years.

Neil


----------



## Paul Chapman (1 Jul 2006)

Noel":aw12jcul said:


> The likes of the most spectacular and maddest sprinter ever, Abdoujaparov (was it he that crashed into the Gendarme who was taking a picture, on the last stage in Paris)



Yes, he was a complete nutter, but talk about entertaining :shock: I often wonder whether that gendarme got his picture :roll: 

Paul


----------



## Shady (1 Jul 2006)

As for nutters, whatever one thinks of him personally, that unbeliveable moment when Lance Armstrong left the road and shot off down a mountain track at full pelt, rejoining a few seconds later (wasn't it to avoid a pile up?), without appearing to miss a beat, was as supreme an example of courage and technical skill that I've seen for a few years...


----------



## Paul Chapman (1 Jul 2006)

Shady":1tpqowef said:


> As for nutters, whatever one thinks of him personally, that unbeliveable moment when Lance Armstrong left the road and shot off down a mountain track at full pelt, rejoining a few seconds later (wasn't it to avoid a pile up?), without appearing to miss a beat, was as supreme an example of courage and technical skill that I've seen for a few years...



Sometimes it's almost as scary as a dado blade :shock: 

For anyone who wants to watch the prologue time trial, live coverage is on ITV3 at 1.30pm, British Eurosport at 2pm, with highlights on ITV4 at 7.30pm. However, the best bits come much later on in the Tour when they get to the mountains - I'll keep you informed 8) 

Paul


----------



## wrightclan (2 Jul 2006)

Noel":2xs1m5sr said:


> Australian wise I was thinking of Cadel Evans, maybe not a win but hopefully on the podium.
> 
> Noel.



Yeah, I did forget about him. I don't know what it is, I've heard a lot of people saying he has podium potential over the past couple of years, and of course he got eighth last year. Maybe it's just that I still think of him as a mountain biker; but he's never made a huge impression on me for some reason. Of course he certainly has as good a chance as some of the riders I mentioned earlier (Simoni, Cunego, Mayo). One thing, not in his favour is the fact that it's less mountainous this year than in any Tour recently. Also, he doesn't have a team that's anywhere near as strong as a Grand Tour team as say CSC or Discovery.

Brad


----------



## Noel (11 Jul 2006)

The real TDF starts tomorrow with the mountains. Goodbye to the sprinters for a few days. Still haven't a clue who will come to the front. Maybe Evans although as Shady mentioned it's not going to be the most difficult of tours this year. Savoldelli of Discovery might be in with a shout as well as T-Mobile's Andreas Kloeden. But certainly the winner will be decided this week. No doubt there's a few others I've left out a few. Is Mayo a climber?

Noel


----------



## Paul Chapman (11 Jul 2006)

The Tour de France reaches the Pyrenees tomorrow - that should start sorting them out :lol: If you enjoy watching people on bikes suffer, highlights are on ITV4 at 7pm :wink: 

Paul


----------



## Paul Chapman (11 Jul 2006)

I would rate George Hincapie of the Discovery Team as the Tour gets into the mountains. He was Lance Armstrong's right-hand man in all his Tour victories, so he has already proved himself to be a very strong and tactically aware rider. His mountain stage victory last year was not only superb but I sensed that he was putting down a marker, knowing that Lance was retiring, leadership of the Discovery Team was up for grabs and victory in this year's Tour was wide open. He also showed his determination, and not a little cunning, in winning the yellow jersey on stage one.

And he's a nice bloke 8) 

Paul


----------



## Noel (11 Jul 2006)

Just watched tonight's programme, Mayo _is_ a climber.
Agree with you Paul, Hincapie has had a good few years working with Armstrong but not sure about securing the lead for any lenght of time. Certainly may win a stage or two this week or in the Alps next week. Great to see Millar sitting in the 20s, although not sure how he'll fair over the next week or so. Evans and Mayo will come to the front (I hope).
Looking forward watching to the Hors Cat climb tomorrow.

Noel


----------



## Paul Chapman (11 Jul 2006)

Noel":6zaevtun said:


> Great to see Millar sitting in the 20s, although not sure how he'll fair over the next week or so.



Yes, I think David Millar has put in a terrific performance given that he has been out of competition for two years. It's really good to see him back and I hope that by the time they reach Paris he will have had a good Tour. I saw the interview with him the other night and I think he has shown great strength of character in coming back so strongly after reaching absolute rock bottom. I wish him well.

Paul


----------



## StevieB (12 Jul 2006)

Hmm, my gut feeling is that Hincapie is a great lieutenant, but possibly not a tour winner. Certainly for this year. I dont have him down as a great climber. Good yes, but not great. He was not besides Lance on every mountain stage last year, whereas Lance was in the lead group or out on his own as is necessary to take the jersey to Paris. Its a tough call this time round, with Vinoukourov, Basso and Ullrich all sidelined I would have to go with Mayo, with possibly a sneaky side bet on Cadel Evans to take a podium spot. Millar is not a moutain man and I can see him sliding back down the classification.

The pyrenees this time round are not as hard as the Alps later on, that is where I would expect the podium to be decided. For those that sit in front of a computer all day, Eurosport carry live commentary (if you can understand Sean :roll: ) and a good summary is Paul Sherwin and Phil Liggetts reports on OLN.com

Cheers,

Steve.


----------



## wrightclan (13 Jul 2006)

StevieB":26kqnbfp said:


> Hmm, my gut feeling is that Hincapie is a great lieutenant, but possibly not a tour winner. Certainly for this year. I dont have him down as a great climber. Good yes, but not great. He was not besides Lance on every mountain stage last year, whereas Lance was in the lead group or out on his own as is necessary to take the jersey to Paris. Its a tough call this time round...
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Steve.



If I recall correctly, Hincapie was among the last of Lance's teammates to be at his side on most mountain stages last year. This was a marked change from previous years, when Hincapie was seen as a Classics specialist. There have been others who have made the transition from sprinter/strongman to all-rounder/stage racer. Jalabert, Kelly and of course Lance. OK, Lance made it in more spectacular style than Kelly or Jalabert; but they both won the Vuelta. and had high placings in the Tour. Jalabert also took the mountains classification in the Tour--not too many cyclists can claim winning both the green jersey and the polka-dot jersey in their career.

It's still hard to tell if Hincapie will make the full leap to Tour contender; but we did see a marked change in his capabilities last year and he is still in a relatively comfortable position in this Tour. But so are many others. Tomorrow should be the first real day for the pretenders to start falling away. As for Mayo; if he doesn't turn things around dramatically tomorrow, it looks like he has already started falling away. A very confusing Tour indeed; but the fog should start to clear tomorrow.

Brad


----------



## Noel (13 Jul 2006)

I agree, nobody appears to be even hinting that they have the legs to be top of the GC. Can't see Mayo doing much after today's performance. I agree, tomorrow is his last chance. Don't think Hincapie will be able to inherit Armstrong's mantle. 
There's too many "one stage wonders" at present. Just hope Evans is being coy/modest during that interview. 11th in the GC and 7 odd minutes back. You never know.
As Brad has said, tomorrow will give us a few clues as to what is going to happen.

Noel


----------



## Paul Chapman (13 Jul 2006)

It's certainly an unpredictable Tour this year. Yesterday a lot of pundits were surprised as several fancied riders were shot off the back.

In previous years there was a sort of order - Lance Armstrong was going to win so everyone planned their race around him and reacted to what he did. This year it was expected to be Ulrich or Basso and I think all the teams probably planned their race on that basis. I think we are going to have to wait for someone to emerge. Today will be hard with several big climbs - not sure who will come out on top but it sure is going to hurt  

Paul


----------



## wrightclan (13 Jul 2006)

Noel":2iq2nbfb said:


> ...11th in the GC and 7 odd minutes back. ...
> Noel



In a sense, he should be viewed as about a minute back. It may be difficult to see who is a real contender, but a few in the top 20 can be readily discounted. The highest placed rider with any real chance, IMO is Landis. Evans is less than a minute behind him. So is Kloden. Hincapie, Savoldelli and Menchov are less than two minutes.

Brad


----------



## Paul Chapman (14 Jul 2006)

To be beaten to the yellow jersey by a bloke who is due to have a plastic hip after the Tour - now that must be really demoralising :wink: :wink: 

Well done Floyd Landis =D> 

Paul


----------



## Paul Chapman (19 Jul 2006)

What a cracking couple of days in the Alps - proof if ever it were needed that the Tour is won and lost in the mountains. I thought Rasmussen's performance today in winning the stage and gaining the King of the Mountains jersey was stunning. But what about poor Floyd Landis - despite Axel Merckx's valiant efforts, Floyd is paying the price of not having a strong team. He must be really demoralised going from race leader to 8 minutes down in a few kilometres. Overall a very exciting Tour, I think, and there is still a question mark over who will win it.

Paul


----------



## wrightclan (19 Jul 2006)

What a race! I think there may be more to it, for Landis, than not having a strong team. He looked ill today, haven't heard anything to confirm it; but he did not look well.

As far as team tactics go, I wonder why Rasmussen was not at Menchov's side. Menchov had a chance to do some real damage toward winning overall; but instead, he was up the road, winning the stage and moving up in the King of the Mountains :-k 

Brad


----------



## Paul Chapman (19 Jul 2006)

wrightclan":34tgn3qp said:


> As far as team tactics go, I wonder why Rasmussen was not at Menchov's side. Menchov had a chance to do some real damage toward winning overall; but instead, he was up the road, winning the stage and moving up in the King of the Mountains :-k



I listened to an interview with Rasmussen after the race and this question was put to him. Following yesterday's stage, when Menchov did not do well, the team had a discussion with their Director and he agreed that Menchov would be unlikely to perform well in today's mountain stage and Rasmussen could have a free hand to ride for himself.

As for Landis, I've ridden up some mountains like those in my youth and I'm not surprised that he looked ill :wink: 

Paul


----------



## wrightclan (19 Jul 2006)

Paul Chapman":2napj2lv said:


> wrightclan":2napj2lv said:
> 
> 
> > As far as team tactics go, I wonder why Rasmussen was not at Menchov's side. Menchov had a chance to do some real damage toward winning overall; but instead, he was up the road, winning the stage and moving up in the King of the Mountains :-k
> ...



I heard a soundbyte, where Rasmussen alluded to that discussion. But when they could see Landis was in trouble, and Menchov was in the Pereiro group; I think if I was Rabobank's director, I would have told Rasmussen there was a change of plans. But then I don't get paid the big bucks. :wink: 

Brad


----------



## Paul Chapman (20 Jul 2006)

wrightclan":2iy9ptem said:


> I think if I was Rabobank's director, I would have told Rasmussen there was a change of plans.



But I think you would have found that Rasmussen's radio would have conveniently malfunctioned at that point 8) 

Paul


----------



## StevieB (20 Jul 2006)

I disagree, There is no way they would call Rasmussen back. Menchov lost time yesterday and even if he put in a big effort today he was not ging to make it to the top of the GC with or without Rasmussen. Far better for Rasmussen to take a stage win and the Polka dot jersy (which he is now unlikely to lose) than fall back to help Menchov take 2nd or third in the GC. Dont forget Kloden and Evans were also in the group of Menchov - it is not only Landis he was riding against.

Rasmussen won the Polka Dot in 2004, it must have been his and the teams realistic ambition for this year also. Menchov will still be in the top 10 of the GC, and a week before the tour started (when Ulrich, Basso and Vinokourov were still in it) that would have been a dream result for the team!

Steve.


----------



## wrightclan (20 Jul 2006)

StevieB":1uaoakgy said:


> I disagree, There is no way they would call Rasmussen back. Menchov lost time yesterday and even if he put in a big effort today he was not ging to make it to the top of the GC with or without Rasmussen. Far better for Rasmussen to take a stage win and the Polka dot jersy (which he is now unlikely to lose) than fall back to help Menchov take 2nd or third in the GC. Dont forget Kloden and Evans were also in the group of Menchov - it is not only Landis he was riding against.
> 
> Rasmussen won the Polka Dot in 2004, it must have been his and the teams realistic ambition for this year also. Menchov will still be in the top 10 of the GC, and a week before the tour started (when Ulrich, Basso and Vinokourov were still in it) that would have been a dream result for the team!
> 
> Steve.



Menchov would not have made it to the top of the GC yesterday; but at one point, he was forcing the pace in the Pereiro group, only to fall back shortly before the end. If Rasmussen had been there, it is likely that would not have happened. Yes, Menchov lost time on Tuesday, but not much time and it was lost to Landis. Menchov is probably now the best time triallist in the top 10, (except perhaps Kloden)with a long time trial coming up. If Rasmussen had been there, he may have set up Menchov to take the lead in the time trial. Then again, Rabobank is not a team which is used to fighting for the overall in the Tour.

BTW, I would just about give my right arm to have Landis' "bad day" yesterday--22nd on the toughest day of the toughest race in the world.

Brad


----------



## Scott (20 Jul 2006)

This lot are all due to pass my house tomorrow afternoon! (our village is some sort of feeding station or something).

I know nothing about cycling but it would have been nice to see ... if I wasn't in Morecambe! I seem to miss it every year


----------



## Paul Chapman (20 Jul 2006)

Scott":1txlq6a2 said:


> This lot are all due to pass my house tomorrow afternoon! (our village is some sort of feeding station or something).
> 
> I know nothing about cycling but it would have been nice to see ... if I wasn't in Morecambe! I seem to miss it every year



Nice though Morecambe may be, I think I would have re-scheduled my trip :wink: Hope you get to see it one year - head for the mountains if at all possible. That's where the real action happens and they don't whiz by so fast  

Paul


----------



## Scott (20 Jul 2006)

Paul Chapman":17mmrsaw said:


> Nice though Morecambe may be



Ahem, moving swiftly on....

Unfortunately rescheduling my trip wasn't an option Paul. Not here for pleasure


----------



## Paul Chapman (20 Jul 2006)

Did you see that ride by Floyd Landis today :shock: Sheer class 8) There have been many great individual performances in the history of the Tour and I reckon that was right up there with the best of them 8) 

Whatever the final outcome (and after today, I really hope Landis wins) this has been a great Tour :wink:

Paul


----------



## wrightclan (20 Jul 2006)

Paul Chapman":18t000vt said:


> Did you see that ride by Floyd Landis today :shock: Sheer class 8) There have been many great individual performances in the history of the Tour and I reckon that was right up there with the best of them 8)
> 
> Whatever the final outcome (and after today, I really hope Landis wins) this has been a great Tour :wink:
> 
> Paul



Spectacular! Edge of your seat! :shock: =D> \/ =D>


----------



## StevieB (21 Jul 2006)

Indeed, a superb performance by Landis. It will all be decided on the final time trial Saturday. On paper Kloden appears the best time trialist, but that yellow jersey is a powerful incentive - I remember Marco Pantani (not the best time trialist by any means) putting in a storming final time trial when he won his Tour. I suspect the jersey will change, but whether to Landis or Sastre I am not sure - on balance I think Landis has too much to do and vote for Saste but it will certainly be interesting to watch!

Steve.


----------



## Paul Chapman (21 Jul 2006)

StevieB":1w0prq6s said:


> I think Landis has too much to do



After yesterday, that's a bold statement :shock: I reckon Landis will do it - in fact after yesterday, I would bet he could walk on water 8) 

Paul


----------



## wrightclan (21 Jul 2006)

StevieB":1dy3gzyx said:


> On paper Kloden appears the best time trialist...
> 
> Steve.



I disagree. On his best day, Kloden may be better than Landis, but Kloden has been very erratic over his career. Then again, Landis has been somewhat erratic lately. This whole Tour has been erratic. :shock: :wink: 

Brad


----------



## Paul Chapman (21 Jul 2006)

Also, Floyd Landis now has the psychological edge over his rivals and that is a very important factor in a time trial :wink: 

Paul


----------



## StevieB (21 Jul 2006)

Sure, I agree he has a psychological advantage, but yesterdays stage took a huge effort. He has to take time out of both of the men that will come after him in the time trial to take yellow. If he can do it he will be a worthy champion indeed!

Steve.


----------



## Paul Chapman (22 Jul 2006)

Let's hear it for Floyd Landis =D> =D> =D> =D> What a fabulous time trial. Superb aerodynamic position on the bike, upper body hardly moving, legs twiddling a slightly lower gear than his rivals - a real joy to watch \/ \/ He has real style 8) 8) What a way to win back the yellow jersey. 

Paul


----------



## wrightclan (22 Jul 2006)

Paul Chapman":1v11v625 said:


> Let's hear it for Floyd Landis =D> =D> =D> =D> What a fabulous time trial. Superb aerodynamic position on the bike, upper body hardly moving, legs twiddling a slightly lower gear than his rivals - a real joy to watch \/ \/ He has real style 8) 8) What a way to win back the yellow jersey.
> 
> Paul



Unbelievable! What a ride by a great guy! =D> =D> =D>


----------



## wrightclan (23 Jul 2006)

_Let's see...won the Tour, now I think I'll go for that hip replacement_. :-k 
(What Landis must be thinking right now.)


----------



## Paul Chapman (23 Jul 2006)

What a cracking Tour =D> =D> I reckon that was one of the best we've seen for a long time - and it produced a real star in Floyd Landis. Let's hope his hip operation goes well. It will be interesting to see whether he is able (or will want) to resume his career afterwards - if he can produce a performance like that with a knackered hip, the mind boggles at what he might produce with a bionic one :shock: :shock: 

Paul


----------



## StevieB (24 Jul 2006)

Indeed, a superb performance. I didnt think he would do it, which goes to show how much I know :lol: 

It will be interesting to see next year how he goes against Basso in the mountains (assuming Basso is still racing!).

The surprise for me was Kloden - he didnt really feature in the tour at all until the final time trial, just marked Landis in the mountains and never made a breakaway attempt in either the Alps or Pyrenees. I thought Sastre would hold on for a podium place but sadly he blew in the time trial.

Roll on 2007 and a London prologue!

Steve.


----------



## wrightclan (24 Jul 2006)

Just read on cyclingnews.com, that Eddy Merckx placed a 100 euro bet at 75:1, for Landis to win the Tour. This was the morning after Landis' "bad" day. :lol: 

Brad


----------



## Paul Chapman (24 Jul 2006)

Eddy Merckx - shrewd on the bike, shrewd off the bike  

Paul


----------



## wrightclan (24 Jul 2006)

Bear in mind, Merckx's son is Landis' lieutenant. Merckx senior gave a pep talk to the team, saying a battle is lost, but the war is not over; no doubt helping to protect his investment. :lol: But Merckx himself won the '75 Tour in similar fashion by launching what seemed at the time to be a foolhardy 130km attack on a mountain stage. The "Cannibal" knows his stuff. 8)


----------



## Paul Chapman (24 Jul 2006)

wrightclan":118kbeoj said:


> But Merckx himself won the '75 Tour in similar fashion by launching what seemed at the time to be a foolhardy 130km attack on a mountain stage.



Yes, when Landis produced that epic ride in the Alps, I remember thinking that was the sort of thing Eddie Merckx would have done - let's hope Floyd can come back after his operation, the sport needs riders like him :wink: 

Paul


----------



## dedee (25 Jul 2006)

Just had to spare a thought for the poor French. It's their game but they are not alllowed (sorry capable) of winning it. A bit like our football team?

Andy


----------



## Chris Knight (25 Jul 2006)

Gawd Andy - hope Valerie doesn't read the forum!


----------



## Paul Chapman (25 Jul 2006)

dedee":1dgacf8x said:


> Just had to spare a thought for the poor French. It's their game but they are not alllowed (sorry capable) of winning it



Don't worry Andy, I'm sure their time will come again. If you look at the history of the Tour, the nationality of the victor has always gone in cycles (excuse the pun :roll: ). At one time Italy was dominant with Coppi and Bartali (saw Coppi race at Herne Hill cycle track in the 1950s - wow, he was impressive); then France had a spell with Bobet and the magnificent Jacques Anquetil; then of course it was Belgium's turn with the ultimate racing machine, Eddy Merckx; a brief spell with France again and Bernard Hinault; then it was Spain's turn with Big Mig, Miguel Indurain before the Americans seemed to take over. In between all these, of course, there were other nationalities, like Switzerland, Luxembourg and Germany.

It looks like France never wins but they have and they will again. Perhaps they just need to cut back a bit on the vino and Gauloises :lol: 

Paul


----------



## Noel (27 Jul 2006)

I was away during the last week of the tour but managed to record the Alpine stages. Finally saw all I missed over the last few days and what a race. Was going to comment on the performance of Landis, especially having managed to claw back 8 odd minutes on GC and the inability or refusal of the pack to chase him down. Then I saw this:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/other_s ... 221122.stm
Bear in mind that as the first sample is positive and this only means that he has the option to have sample B tested and the option to prove if the levels of testosterone/epitestosterone are produced naturally.
Whatever the outcome it's tainted this years event even more.

Stars for the future: Evans, Cunego, Schleck amongst others.

Good to see Millar and Wiggins making it to Paris.

Noel


----------



## Paul Chapman (27 Jul 2006)

Noel":2gbm73gg said:


> Then I saw this:
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/other_s ... 221122.stm
> Bear in mind that as the first sample is positive and this only means that he has the option to have sample B tested and the option to prove if the levels of testosterone/epitestosterone are produced naturally.
> Whatever the outcome it's tainted this years event even more.



I'd missed that, Noel - thanks for pointing it out. What a blow. Let's hope it turns out to be a mistake of some sort, but it doesn't look good  

Paul


----------



## Mcluma (27 Jul 2006)

the whole tour is a bl**dy joke

They are so full of drugs that the top of the body doesn't know what the bottom of the body is doing :evil: :evil: :evil: 

there such a bunch of amateurs


----------



## Alf (28 Jul 2006)

Mcluma":2kqo1lug said:


> there such a bunch of amateurs


Unfortunately they're _not_ a bunch of amateurs and that seems to be the problem. Take the money out of it and chances are you'll eliminate the drugs as well.

Cheers, Alf


----------



## Paul Chapman (28 Jul 2006)

Alf":2ei98gay said:


> Mcluma":2ei98gay said:
> 
> 
> > there such a bunch of amateurs
> ...



Well said, Alf 8) 

Paul


----------



## StevieB (28 Jul 2006)

I often wonder just how much of a performance advantage these 'supposed' drug cheats actually have. Sure, something like boosting red blood cells with EPO is going to help but the levels of nandrolone detected in athletics and stimulants in asthma inhalers or paracetamol for example are surely less of an advantage?

I remember a couple of years ago one of the tour riders was stung on the eyelid by a wasp. This needed a cream to take the swelling down but by using it he would be deemed to be a drug cheat so he had to resign from the tour. Is this seriously going to give him a performance advantage?

If Landis had excess testosterone (and I am not condoning drug taking in any way here) would it really have given him a 6 minute advantage over the rest of the field on stage 17?! Far more likely (IMHO) to be a consequence of a solo 130km breakaway effort and a big push to hold a 6 minute advantage on the last climb of the day.

I agree that limits need to be set and there has to be a threshold, it just seems somewhat arbitrary sometimes. Take EPO - it cannot be detected so your hematocrit level (red blood cell count) above a certain percentage is used as a reference. EPO is only one of many ways rbc count can be increased, training at altitude is another. Marco Pantani got caught by this - his rbc level was above the threshold so he was disqualified from the race. Since its an advantage to have a high rbc count, athletes train at altitude to get it as high as possible without going over the limit. Does someone with a 51% level really have such a huge advantage over someone with a 49% level? Short answer - no. But the limit has to be drawn somewhere so guilt by indirect association ensues.

This is a different issue to the Ullrich, Basso drug taking allegations (Ullrich has been sacked by T-Mobile I notice for failing to adequately clear his name) where riders have been found to be visiting a dodgy doctor for unspecified reasons. That is just daft as the doctor had been implicated previously.

I guess the point I am trying to make is two fold - are we 100% certain they are cheating or is it more a case of - well, you had above a threshold limit in your system so it will be assumed its there illegally and you will be stripped of your title and banned for 2 years, and secondly do these breaches actually give a performance advantage sufficient to win races that otherwise would not have been won?

Slightly off topic, one of the biggest differences between individuals is in genetics - it defines all of us and the differences between us. Genetic testing still has not hit the mainstream and associations with race and 'selection and eugenics' mean that it is still somewhat of a taboo subject to be discussed in terms of 'perforance advantage' but eventually it is going to surface as a factor. Then the cack really will hit the fan as it will be a human rights issue, a race issue and an ethical issue as to whether this information should or could be used to determine athletic ability or indeed any other attribute you care to mention. THis is not the same as 'designier babies', but more selection of existing individuals as particularly suited to an athletic endeavour as a consequence of their genetic makeup. It will be a factor in the future and I am not sure yet how it is going to be dealt with.

Cheery thought isn't it!

Steve.


----------



## Noel (28 Jul 2006)

Time will tell...
The B sample will no doubt reflect the result of the A sample but, as has been alluded to in previous posts, the increased testosterone/epitestosterone values are not exactly performance enchancing. Reading other reports he is taking medication for a thyroid problem as well as various painkillers for his soon to be replaced hip. Landis also had a few beers and a few shots of Jack Daniels to get over his poor performance on Stage 16.
I've an open mind about it all at present although I think LeTour / UCI / Phonak perhaps should've waited for confirmation on the B sample before going public and Pat McQuaid (UCI chief) should've taken a similar approach. 
It'll be interesting to see what Paul Kimmage has to say on the matter in the Sunday Times this weekend.
No matter what the eventual outcome the TDF and pro-cycling in general will find it hard to recover from the adverse attention.

Noel


----------



## wrightclan (28 Jul 2006)

Noel":af2hiyum said:


> I've an open mind about it all at present...
> 
> Noel



Unlike some...



Mcluma":af2hiyum said:


> the whole tour is a bl**dy joke
> 
> They are so full of drugs that the top of the body doesn't know what the bottom of the body is doing Evil or Very Mad Evil or Very Mad Evil or Very Mad
> 
> there such a bunch of amateurs


----------



## Noel (29 Jul 2006)

It takes all sorts......

What do you reckon Brad about Landis? I'm getting to the stage (etape?) where I'm starting to think he wasn't doping, at least not on purpose.

Noel


----------



## wrightclan (29 Jul 2006)

Noel":2r8bemyf said:


> It takes all sorts......
> 
> What do you reckon Brad about Landis? I'm getting to the stage (etape?) where I'm starting to think he wasn't doping, at least not on purpose.
> 
> Noel



In the current climate, it's getting hard to believe anyone. However, Landis truly does not strike me as someone who would even consider it. I think I can be honest with myself and anyone else in saying that such a view of Landis is not based on him being a fellow American. He just strikes me as one of the most straightforward guys in any sport.

Unfortunately, even if he proves his innocence, his victory will be tainted forever. Especially in light of recent events.

Brad


----------



## Paul Chapman (29 Jul 2006)

wrightclan":3rvsafn7 said:


> In the current climate, it's getting hard to believe anyone.



And over the years some of the testing authorities have been shown to be rather incompetent, which has further complicated and confused the issue :? 

Paul


----------



## wrightclan (29 Jul 2006)

Paul Chapman":1hmcu4io said:


> wrightclan":1hmcu4io said:
> 
> 
> > In the current climate, it's getting hard to believe anyone.
> ...



Even the WADA website says that the method used to test for T/E ratio is an inaccurate method. Also, the lab in question has been sanctioned in recent years for unethical behaviour.

Brad


----------



## Paul Chapman (29 Jul 2006)

wrightclan":3fv20wtu said:


> Paul Chapman":3fv20wtu said:
> 
> 
> > wrightclan":3fv20wtu said:
> ...



Well, there you go. Strikes me that all this press hype before the facts are known does nothing but damage individuals and sport in general. Everyone (the media, the testing labs as well as anyone involved in any illegal drugs) is just making a fast buck at other people's expense.

Paul


----------



## wrightclan (29 Jul 2006)

In addition to the inaccuracy of the current testing methodology, apparently, they just reduced the threshold this year for a positive t/e ratio from 6:1 to 4:1. Now, I'm no scientist or lab technician, but I do know a bit about statistical analysis. If you have a methodology which is already somewhat unreliable; do you not increase that unreliability exponentially, when you reduce the threshold by a third?

Brad


----------



## Noel (29 Jul 2006)

And this pile of nonsense from Pat McQuaid really doesn't help matters:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/other_s ... 223238.stm
This is about the 100th time this mantra has been aired either from the UCI, the Tour organisers or some other cycling head honcha since the '98 Festina scandal.
But what really gets me is McQuaid's further condemation of Landis. Nothing has been proven yet. He is still the 2006 TDF winner, he is still a member of Phonak (albeit suspended).
As Brad and Paul and others have mentioned, the full story is not known and until it is all this condemation by the press, UCI etc is totally wrong.
It's time the UCI, WADA etc get their own house in order. Then they will be able to attack and eventually eliminate doping in cycling.

Noel


----------



## Paul Chapman (29 Jul 2006)

Well said, Noel. Every time we get this - all the people in charge running for cover, saying "It's nothing to do with me mate, but I'll sort it out". Then they wait until the story dies down and do nothing. Meanwhile, people like Floyd Landis, whether innocent or guilty, have their livelihood taken away from them.

I reckon it was a cracking Tour and until someone PROVES he was cheating, Floyd Landis is still a hero in my book - so there :wink: 

Paul


----------



## wrightclan (29 Jul 2006)

Just read something that puts this into perspective. Earlier I mentioned that the t/e/ ratio deemed positive had been reduced from 6:1 to 4:1. Apparently, a few years ago, it was 10:1. East German bodybuilders had been tested at 100:1! :shock: 

So if Landis tested positive, it could be that his level was 4.1:1 and he could well test regularly at 3.9:1. That's the problem--no one knows, not even him or his doctors. They are never given analytical results--only negative or positive.

The more I read, the more dubious I am of the system, in particular in relation to Testosterone (a lot of other tests are much more black and white). I'm more and more coming to the view that Landis is the unwitting victim of a very unfortunate set of circumstances.

Brad


----------



## Noel (30 Jul 2006)

Here's the view of Paul Kimmage:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0, ... 41,00.html
Makes interesting reading, especially from an ex pro's point of view. Not sure I understand his reasoning for judging Landis as he does.

Noel


----------



## Paul Chapman (30 Jul 2006)

Very interesting, Noel :? I think the clever journalists always write in a way in which they they are able to say "Told you so", whatever the outcome :wink: 

Most of the debate seems to be centred on the fact that Landis blew up one day, then came back and thrashed everyone the next. They seem to be taking the view that's just not possible. Well I don't buy that and I think it was entirely possible.

When I think back to my early cycle racing days in the 1960s, most riders took the view that you could only produce a good performance once a week. Over holiday weekends, like Easter, Whitsun, etc where they would ride several time trials, they would produce a good performance in the first one and lesser performances in the subsequent races, citing the fact that they were knackered from the first race to justify their subsequent poor performances. 10 years later riders like Alf Engers (remember him or are you too young?) would produce blistering performances three days in a row, probably going faster each day.

The reason is, of course, training became more focused and scientific. When you are really fit your recovery rate is extremely rapid. Look at the top 6-day riders. I remember watching people like Peter Post and Patrick Sercu (probably the best 6-day pairing ever) produce blistering performances night after night, including madisons and motor-paced races, where they would go faster and faster as the days went on.

When ever there is any sort of scandal, out come the armchair critics (I'm not including Paul Kimmage in that as he is an ex-pro rider) who all have a point of view, but many have never ridden a bike, let alone have any idea what it is like to ride up mountains like the Alps.

If Landis did cheat then I will have no sympathy with him. But I'm not convinced he did based on his performance. It is entirely possible for a very fit athlete to recover from a very bad day in the way he did and blow away the rest of the field. I'm still happy to wait until we have a proper conclusion based on accurate scientific evidence.

Paul


----------



## Noel (30 Jul 2006)

I agree with all that you've said Paul. After all, how well and how quick you can recover is a direct reflection of how fit you are. I normally respect Kimmage's work and I'm assuming that he feels, with his experience as a TDF rider, he can spot a "juiced" rider from 100yds. In this case I don't agree with him. There have been many instances where a rider has been dropped because of lack of energy, bonking (where the rider cannot sustain his power output because of dehydration or not enough food) or plain knackeredness and comes back on the next stage and finishes on the podium.
I still have faith in Landis and he was the fitted and strongest rider on this year's event. But I've been wondering why the peleton did not chase him down? Did they suspect something? Or was it due to a case of "forget him, he's 8 minutes down" or was it sheer incompetence? 
I sincerely hope he is clean and gets through this one way or another.

Noel.
Patrick Sercu? The 2nd best rider out of Belguim. Alf Engers? Before my time I'm afraid.


----------



## Paul Chapman (30 Jul 2006)

Yes, Patrick Sercu's forte was the track - he was World Sprint Champion several times. He was a typical Belgian - no sense of humour but rode like lightning. The pairing of Sercu and Dutchman Peter Post was probably ideal because they were opposites - Post was all humour as well as lightning speed. Post was sponsored by Gazelle Cycles and Wilhelm II cigars and it was amusing seeing him in his trackside cabin puffing on a cigar before returning to the track to thrash the opposition :shock: 

Alf Engers was a brilliant time-trialist. I think I am right in saying he was the first UK cyclist to ride a 25 mile time trial inside 50 minutes.

Paul


----------



## Paul Chapman (30 Jul 2006)

Noel, I found a piece on Alf Engers ("King Alf") which you might find interesting. There are some pictures and two links to the text of a speech he gave to the Pedal Club which gives a bit of an insight to the good old days :wink: http://www.bikebrothers.co.uk/engers.htm

Paul


----------



## wrightclan (1 Aug 2006)

If you're interested, look here http://www.veloriders.co.uk/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=42041 for my rant on a cycling forum. I'm known as _exracer_ on that forum.

Brad


----------



## Mcluma (1 Aug 2006)

Correct, i have an open mind, but i know when things are not right

and as i suspected al allonge,

the man is dodgy

The high concentrations of testosterone is of a syntethical external source

and more important, Landis has not even asked for the contra expertise on his B sample, so what does that tell you.

I rest my case


----------



## wrightclan (1 Aug 2006)

Mcluma":2utva171 said:


> Correct, i have an open mind, but i know when things are not right
> 
> and as i suspected al allonge,
> 
> ...



An open mind does not rest its case, solely on opinion.

Brad


----------



## Paul Chapman (1 Aug 2006)

Many thanks for that link, Brad. Your statistical analysis is very interesting. What is also interesting is that many of the top sportsmen do differ from the average. I seem to remember that Eddy Merckx has a naturally low pulse rate and Miguel Indurain has a naturally large lung capacity - as does Matthew Pinsent the rower. So it's quite normal for some of the top sports people not to be normal - which, of course, is why they can do what they do. There are often unusual factors that explain exceptional performances.

But, blimey, some people on that site do jump to conclusions :shock: I prefer your more measured statistical approach - keep up the good work and thanks again for the link :wink: 

Paul


----------



## Mcluma (1 Aug 2006)

Wrightclan / Exracer

I am not opinioned, I state the facts


The fact is - his urine sample contained traces of syntactical testosterone of an external source


----------



## StevieB (1 Aug 2006)

Mcluma, could you post the source of this statement please - I have not heard the official line on the synthetic derivative being in his sample.

Cheers,

Steve[/quote]


----------



## Mcluma (1 Aug 2006)

Sorry, but picked it up from the dutch newspapers


----------



## dedee (1 Aug 2006)

Brad
thanks for the forum link - had a good chuckle, not at your post but the reaction that followed.
How do you think that lot would get on with the dado debate?

Andy


----------



## wrightclan (1 Aug 2006)

dedee":32o0agqe said:


> Brad
> thanks for the forum link - had a good chuckle, not at your post but the reaction that followed.
> How do you think that lot would get on with the dado debate?
> 
> Andy


 :roll: :wink:


----------



## Paul Chapman (1 Aug 2006)

wrightclan":1hi41dqt said:


> dedee":1hi41dqt said:
> 
> 
> > Brad
> ...



Don't think I'd waste your time with them, Brad. Light-hearted banter is one thing but they just seem to be a waste of space :wink: 

Paul


----------



## Noel (1 Aug 2006)

Mcluma":3ve3yhzk said:


> Correct, i have an open mind, but i know when things are not right
> 
> and as i suspected al allonge,
> 
> ...



He officially asked for the B sample to be tested yesterday (July 31st). Results will be known before Friday as the lab dealing with the sample will be closed for 2 weeks holiday (which itself says alot about the whole anti-doping regime). I, and the rest of the world, expect a similar result to Sample A but I still think that Landis did not dope. Would prefer the 2 samples to be tested by 2 different labs considering WADA's testing history.

Noel


----------



## wrightclan (1 Aug 2006)

Paul Chapman":17kk6dnp said:


> wrightclan":17kk6dnp said:
> 
> 
> > dedee":17kk6dnp said:
> ...



Yeah, they make us woodworkers sound positively courteous and erudite. :shock: Almost makes me more ashamed to be a cyclist, than the current drugs debacle does. That said, there are a few on that website who are more reasoned, but, even before I posted, I could see that they were being drowned out. :roll: :roll: Is it any wonder that the media and general public have such a dim view of cycling, when even the cyclists are ready to convict, before all the facts are in.

BTW, I think I read somewhere, that more than half of the Operation Puerto 'suspects' have been exonerated. Also, curiously; Dr. Fuentes said he also treated footballers, tennis players, basketball stars, and athletes--none of their names have been released as yet. :-k


----------



## Noel (1 Aug 2006)

Getting interesting day by day......

"_UCI source confirms exogenous testosterone in Landis' A sample 
The New York Times edition of Tuesday, August 1 has published information which substantiates previous reports in French L'Equipe newspaper, according to which exogenous, synthetic testosterone was found in Floyd Landis' A sample of July 20. A source "within the UCI anti-doping department, with knowledge of the result" Landis' probe returned, said in an interview that some of the testosterone in his body had come from an external source and was not produced by his system. 

The Isotope Ratio Mass Spectrometry test (IRMS), which differentiates between natural and synthetic testosterone, was done after Landis' ratio of testosterone/epitestosterone was found to be more than twice what is allowed under World Anti-Doping Agency rules, the person said. 

Landis' personal doctor, Dr. Brent Kay of Temecula, California, told the New York Times he hoped that the results of the test and of the initial T/E test were false positives. He did, however, confirm rumours that the initial test found a ratio of 11/1 in Landis's system. He and Landis are seeking an explanation for that high level. 

The result of Landis' B sample is expected to be known before the week-end."_

L'Equipe, as always, bringing you the news first......


----------



## wrightclan (1 Aug 2006)

Noel":x84y2wfs said:


> Getting interesting day by day......
> 
> "_UCI source confirms exogenous testosterone in Landis' A sample
> The New York Times edition of Tuesday, August 1 has published information which substantiates previous reports in French L'Equipe newspaper, according to which exogenous, synthetic testosterone was found in Floyd Landis' A sample of July 20. A source "within the UCI anti-doping department, with knowledge of the result" Landis' probe returned, said in an interview that some of the testosterone in his body had come from an external source and was not produced by his system.
> ...



Not looking good for Landis. But I wonder, if the IRMS test is reliable, why is that not the standard test administered?

Brad


----------



## Alf (1 Aug 2006)

Paul Chapman":222akug7 said:


> wrightclan":222akug7 said:
> 
> 
> > dedee":222akug7 said:
> ...


Bit hard to judge on one thread - I daresay I come across as a waste of space in some threads.

Erm, maybe we'd better not take that thought any further... 8-[

Cheers, Alf


----------



## Paul Chapman (1 Aug 2006)

Alf":lbw81zye said:


> I daresay I come across as a waste of space in some threads.
> 
> 8-[



:shock: :shock:


----------



## Mcluma (1 Aug 2006)

I think Alf was referring to massive pieces of unwritten text 
























Like this. wich is a waste of space in itself

didn't you Alf :wink:


----------



## Alf (2 Aug 2006)

But...










































... I so rarely do that. :wink:


----------



## Noel (2 Aug 2006)

Commom sense prevails? Surely not? At last a bit of decency has finally surfaced:

"_Landis B sample result due Saturday
The result of the test of Floyd Landis' B sample should be known Saturday, according to the UCI. However, the organisation has declined to comment on the record about the report in yesterday's New York Times that isotope testing of the A sample revealed evidence of exogenous testosterone.

UCI counsel Philippe Verbiest confirmed to the Associated Press that an isotope test had taken place, but declined to provide details, while UCI president Pat McQuaid said he had not seen the test results.

*McQuaid also said that no penalties would be imposed on Landis until he had a chance to defend himself before an arbitration panel*. If the B sample test also returns a testosterone:epitestosterone ratio above the permitted level, which Landis and his representatives have said they expect, then the arbitration panel will be Landis' opportunity to demonstrate that the elevated ratio has an origin other than doping. Landis could then take the case to the Court of Arbitration for Sport.

The French anti-doping lab at Châtenay-Malabry, where the test will take place, is due to close for holidays this weekend. McQuaid said that the necessary test is a two and a half day process while UCI medical officer Enrico Carpani told AFP, "We have done everything to ensure that all goes quickly and the laboratory has agreed to extend its opening hours until Saturday."_
Lifted from cyclingnews
The first sensible thing McQuaid has said for a very long time.

Noel


----------



## Paul Chapman (2 Aug 2006)

Thanks for that, Noel. All sounds a bit more measured at last, thank goodness :wink: 

Paul


----------



## Mcluma (5 Aug 2006)

Well it looks like the curtain is closing for Landis,

It is hard for the man, I must admit
- his B sample positif 
- and Phonak has fired him with immediate effect.

Its up to the man himself to defend the case in court

Will this be the last we have heard from him, as he has been banned from pro-Tours for four years!!!!


----------



## Paul Chapman (5 Aug 2006)

Mcluma":2db07si3 said:


> Will this be the last we have heard from him



I doubt it. Being fired by his team, banning him from competition and stripping him of his Tour win are, more or less, automatic under the rules. However, I still have an open mind about the whole issue. The world of illegal substances and of testing is a murky one. Landis still claims he did not take any illegal substance so I think we need to at least allow him the opportunity to substantiate that claim. Maybe his body does produce unusually high levels of testosterone - many 'ordinary' people are regularly treated by their GPs because they produce more or less of one thing or another. It's all very sad but I don't think the issue is over yet.

Paul


----------



## Noel (8 Aug 2006)

Heard Landis being interviewed by John Humpherys on R4's Today programme this morning and I still have an open mind about the whole situation. His reported original defense that his body has high levels of naturally produced testoserone is not now being used as a possible point of innocence. Apparently he was advised to say this by his defense team. He was on Good Morning America yesterday but as I've a broken sound card canny listen to it- http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/other_s ... 254402.stm
I imagine he has said much the same in the American interview. With Humphreys he concentrated on the ethics and efficacy of the testing lab, WADA and the UCI regime. Maybe he's clutching at straws but he came across as being forthright, truthful and sensible. Especially considering he was interviewed by Humphreys. I guess time will tell.

Maybe I missed something but has Oscar Pereiro being officially declared the TDF winner? By the UCI? He seems to think so considering all the interviews he's being giving over the past day or so.

Noel


----------



## StevieB (8 Aug 2006)

> Maybe I missed something but has Oscar Pereiro being officially declared the TDF winner? By the UCI? He seems to think so considering all the interviews he's being giving over the past day or so.



Apparently yet to be decided according to the last line in the BBC article. Seems a shame to be sacked by your team before you have been allowed to give a defence and found guilty. Kind of suggests the team have no faith in their riders. It might be standard practice, and I agree he should not race again until proven innocent or guilty, but if it was me I would hope my team had faith in my innocence :roll: 

Steve.


----------



## johnelliott (8 Aug 2006)

StevieB":ak3pfp74 said:


> Apparently yet to be decided according to the last line in the BBC article. Seems a shame to be sacked by your team before you have been allowed to give a defence and found guilty. Kind of suggests the team have no faith in their riders. It might be standard practice, and I agree he should not race again until proven innocent or guilty, but if it was me I would hope my team had faith in my innocence :roll:
> 
> Steve.



But surely he has been proved guilty already. The issue is whether or not he had higher than legal levels of proscribed substances, and two tests have proved that he did. I can't see how anything he or anyone else could say could change that. 

John


----------



## StevieB (8 Aug 2006)

Nope, he is entitled to a defence. Until now all we know is that abnormally high levels of testosterone have been found, not how they got there. He may well have cheated, he may well be innocent. But until he has a chance to defend himself I feel that its a shame the team have sacked him.

There are ways in which the samples could have high levels without him doping, the team have presumed that he has cheated and consequently sacked him. That is not innocent until proved guilty, it is guilty until proven otherwise.

OK, its not a court case in which the usual rules apply, but while there is a chance the samples could be illegal by non-cheating means (ie naturally high levels, by product of medication for his hip, etc) and if that is subsequently proven his winning the TDF will stand, then he is being judged before a defence is heard.

I do not know which way it will go, and hope for the sake of the sport he can clear his name. He will be forever tainted now however, even if subsequently found innocent. 

Steve.


----------



## Noel (8 Aug 2006)

Yes Stevie, apparently the UCI have not declared Pereiro the winner.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/other_s ... 254402.stm
Strange how Pereiro has said he is happy being the winner of the 2006 event.
The whole thing is a total mess.


----------



## johnelliott (8 Aug 2006)

StevieB":1ptc9je0 said:


> Nope, he is entitled to a defence. Until now all we know is that abnormally high levels of testosterone have been found, not how they got there. He may well have cheated, he may well be innocent. But until he has a chance to defend himself I feel that its a shame the team have sacked him.
> 
> There are ways in which the samples could have high levels without him doping, the team have presumed that he has cheated and consequently sacked him. That is not innocent until proved guilty, it is guilty until proven otherwise.
> 
> ...



How the levels came to be as high as they were is an interesting discussion point, but it's not the point of the rules. The rules say how high a level of testosterone is allowed, and his was too high, as two seperate tests proved. Whether the levels are natural or not isn't at issue, althugh you may feel it should be.
The only possible defence would be something along the lines of- the tests were inaccurate, or maybe the samples had been tampered with, or weren't his, something along those lines. That the levels were natural just won't do it

John


----------



## Noel (8 Aug 2006)

John, appreciate your interest in the situation. In an ideal world your view would make sense, that is, samples showed excessive or irregular amounts of testoserone therefore Landis had doped and is stripped of his title, banned and castrated by the cycling world and the media. Alas things are not so simple.
Putting aside his initial claims that his high testoserone level was natural (he has now said that he was advised to say this to the media by his Spanish advisers and has since retracted the claim). The basis of his defense now is that a mistake has been made in the testing procedures, that the test lab did not adhere to the rules concerning anonymity and objectivity. Furthermore he rightly has claimed that the identity/owner of the urine sample should not have been made public so early. Granted, alot of these claims will have no bearing on the core issue - did he dope?

Doping has been a thorn in the side of the sport for many years and since the Festina scandal in '98 has been a regular side show to the main event.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/special_repo ... 134842.stm
The situation was further inflamed as a result of "Operación Puerto", a sporting drugs investigation being conducted by the Spanish police which resulted in the banning of over 50 riders (including the favourite) from this year's TDF. The basis for this action was that the riders in question appeared on a list that was found when the police raided the offices of a Dr Fuentes and found DIY blood banks, EPO etc. This doctor specialised in "assisting" athletes of all descriptions in "improving" performance in their particular sport (so expect to hear more concerning field and track athletes, swimmers etc). As far as I'm aware the riders were not given the opportunity of due process and were in effect guilty by association although a few riders managed to get into the race by virtue of legal arguement in court. My own personal view is that some or maybe most of the riders thrown out were indeed doping.
My last point is that the anti-doping regime and WADA (World Anti Doping Agency) has been seen not to be consistant in their testing procedures, have, at times, carried out sample testing using un-proved or out dated technology and have failed to be seen as transparent despite what the UCI (world cycling authority) claim. Furthermore WADA has resisted calls that sample testing be carried out by 2 different facilities in order that total objectivity and fairness can be achieved.
So essentially a lot of the cycling world has no faith in WADA and their testing and technical standards. This can also be said for the UCI and their chief Pat McQuaid and to some extent the TDF organisers (the ISO).

So John, there you have it in a rather large nutshell. As I've mentioned several time before I still have an open mind about whither Floyd Landis was doping or not. Difficult to have belief in the kangaroo court system that the cycling authorites use.

Noel


----------



## johnelliott (8 Aug 2006)

Noel":3avahv71 said:


> samples showed excessive or irregular amounts of testoserone therefore Landis had doped



But I didn't say that, and it isn't the point I was trying to make. For the avoidance of doubt, what I am saying is that he had an illegal level of testosterone in his urine, and that that is why he has been disqualified. I am not saying that he must have intentionally or otherwise doped, all I am saying, and I presume the authorities too, is that he had an illegally high level

Same thing with drink driving, one isn't prosecuted for drinking and then driving, one is prosecuted for having an illegallly high level of alcohol in the blood. How it got there is not taken into consideration

John


----------



## wrightclan (9 Aug 2006)

johnelliott":vqirp0t5 said:


> Noel":vqirp0t5 said:
> 
> 
> > samples showed excessive or irregular amounts of testoserone therefore Landis had doped
> ...



But as regards tesosterone, how it got there _is_ supposed to be taken into consideration. WADA's own rules state that the ratio test is only to be used to determine if further testing is necessary. Such further testing is done to determine if it is natural or synthetic, and if the sportsperson in question regularly produces such levels. 

Unfortunately, that course of action was not followed by the lab in question, the Tour organisers, Dick Pound of the WADA, or even Landis' Phonak team

Testosterone is naturally produced by a person's body; alcohol is not. Therefore your drink driving analogy isn't relevant.

Brad


----------



## wrightclan (9 Aug 2006)

Just found from a number of sources, including the BBC, that he did not have a high level of testosterone at all. He had an exceedingly low level of epitestosterone; thus producing the high ratio. :-k 

Brad


----------



## Paul Chapman (10 Aug 2006)

The plot thickens :? :? :? 

Paul


----------

