Cyclist Floyd Landis Admits Doping, Alleges Use by Armstrong and Others .

+2

yeah whos the french rider i read about last year? or two years ago in the tour who was actually clean and other riders slightly respected? him but also made fun of him like he was a wierdo. I think his name was moreau? or something like that.

I would be shocked if Lance was clean. Also in terms of running vs cycling obv cycling has more but its hard to say who is clean and who isnt in running. I like Haile more than anyone but jos hermans is obv suspicious. However clearly ALL the kenyans and ethiopians are not on drugs there are way too many of them- especially kenyans.

Also HS running in US has never had more people running fast than it does right now. Its getting to the point where a 9:00 2 miler is kind of average on the elite scene.

I knew there would be some comments on Lance Armstrong but almost 100% of the posts mention him. (And I just did it too)

A couple of things puzzle me about Landis.

He apparently put on a steroid patch right in the middle of the Tour De France. They test constantly, especially the contendors. How did he figure to pass the test?

I know he had a system that allowed him to pass other tests. Did he just roll the dice this time and reach for the "I drank a bunch of liquor in the middle of this race that I won" excuse?

Studying how they ever fail is interesting to me given the fact that they pass tests all the time even though they are using.

Also, the denials were amazing. He didn't just deny using when he was asked.

He booked talk shows all over and steadfastly claimed that that he never took anything. He seeked attention to discuss how he wasn't taking drugs.

Now this.

Avocados Number wrote:

I don't think that it's limited to cycling, but I would be surprised to learn that most international-caliber distances are dopers. .

Dude you are delusional if you really believe that.

Live a life of total poverty or take the needle and win big money for RUNNING of all things. Seems like a pretty easy decision to make.

Wheatboy wrote:

Old Runner Guy - where are you?????????????? Surely you won't believe this article or the quotes by Landis. I'm guessing you think he was telling the truth before but was pressured into "lying" now as part of some great conspiracy.

IMO, anyone who actually believed Landis never took PEDs was out of their mind. The same goes for Lance.

I have no idea if Lance is guilty or not. I want to think he probably is, but I'll wait for hard evidence.

But, to comment on the WSJ article, one of Landis's claims strikes me as hard to believe. Landis claims that in 2003 in Girona Lance was keeping packs of refrigerated blood in his apartment, blood from him (Armstrong) and several other riders including Landis for use later that year in the TdF.

Now, let's think about this for a minute. By 2003 pro cycling had been under intense scrutiny for several years regarding doping, and by 2003 Lance had vigorously denied ever using PEDs many times. So, according to Landis, Lance was not only lying repeatedly, but he was keeping loads of incriminating evidence in his apartment! And, when Lance goes away for a few weeks he trusts the whole scheme and his whole career and his lifetime reputation to another teammate/cyclist to watch over.

I know someone who escorted Armstrong on a USO tour to Afghanistan a couple years ago who said he was a real asshole. Trust me, I have no great love for Armstrong. But Landis' claim about the Girona apartment seems a little far fetched to me. No one has ever accused Armstrong of being stupid and careless.

RuKiddingMe! wrote:

So let me get this right, let's pretent we are all jurors .."

Big difference between a court of law and the truth.

OJ isn't guilty of murder in the eyes of the court, but I think we all know better.

Come on man, use the brain you were born with! Just accept that doping is as big a part of pro athletics as intervals, running shoes, and gatorade.

3 questions for Armstrong defenders:

1) McGwire, Sosa, and Bonds also "have never tested positive." Did you believe they were clean? (For McGwire, were you surprised at his confession?)

2) Did Jose Canseco have more or less credibility when he ratted than Landis does now?

3) How did Armstrong beat champion-level racers who were doping by such a large margin? Better training methods? More grit? Hypnotists? Acupuncture? Drinking turtle blood? Tell me what your theory is, because I'd like to know...

It's hard to discern Landis's motive in sending these provocative e-mails. The one thing that's clear is that he's abandoned his strategy of protesting his innocence, which wasn't getting him anywhere. Now it seems his strategy is to try and win public sympathy by admitting the error of his ways (as did David Millar) and falling back on the "everybody was doing it" defence which has been used many times before in cycling and in other sports.

It's a neat trick as it puts the ball in the Armstrong/Zabriskie/Leipheimer court. Regardless of Landis's lack of credibility they are now tainted by his allegations and must weigh up legal action. I hope Landis has some good evidence because if he can't substantiate his allegations then they'll sue him to within an inch of his life for defamation.

Looks like a lot of guys will have a pretty strong case if they wanted to sue Landis for saying such things.

Do you think they will? Haha. Funny stuff, as if Lance could even think about it.

Witness after witness under oath. He no want people to take an oath, because they might have to tell the truth.

Bonzo Dog wrote:

I hope Landis has some good evidence because if he can't substantiate his allegations then they'll sue him to within an inch of his life for defamation.

He's "unsueable" First they do NOT want all that stuff to come out in court, second, he has nothing to lose. He's broke, no career, no life...

Heck with the knowledge he has about doping he coulda made more money by going around helping others dope and beat the system, find the drugs, etc...

Look drug dealers only start ratting out other drug dealers once they are caught, so of course no witness is going to be a squeaky clean character, but that doesnt mean they arent telling the truth. Same with dirty cops, crooked politicans etc..

Best post so far. Couldn't agree more.

And Lance will win 2010 TDF.

I have to admit, I actually did think he was not guilty. I really did believe him. I strangely feel the need to publicly admit THAT here.

And even now I actually do still believe Armstrong is not a doper.

good wrote:

Get me a positive test and I will honestly be more then happy to do just that.

You cannot be serious. Those of you who still don't believe in Mr. Armstrong deviant behavior are in complete denial. You have probably forgotten that the French lab that caught Landis also ran some tests on some past samples when the first EPO test became available. Guess, who came back positive ... Lance Armsweak. It was a blind test so don't give me the French wanted Armstrong to be positive. Remember also that one year, the French police followed one of the car of Armstrong's team to a rest area and saw them get rid of some trash. Guess what they found in it: some doping packages, think Actovegin.

One more thing, if you think that Lance went to the infamous Dr. Ferrari just for training program, there is not much else we can do. Here is two quotes from Lance's former "coach": "If it doesn't show up in the drug controls, then it's not doping,", "EPO is not dangerous, it's the abuse that is. It's also dangerous to drink ten liters of orange juice."

trollism wrote:

Looks like a lot of guys will have a pretty strong case if they wanted to sue Landis for saying such things.

Do you think they will? Haha. Funny stuff, as if Lance could even think about it.

Witness after witness under oath. He no want people to take an oath, because they might have to tell the truth.

This is exactly what Landis is trying to do. He is going to force Lance and Johan to sue him for defamation so his attorneys can put them under oath. There is a big difference between a positive test and a ban on cycling and hard time in the slammer for lying under oath.

The fact of the matter is that cycling is ok with a low level of doping. On the tour, if the GC conteders were 100% clean, there would be massive lead changes and a total crap shoot as to who would win. It just is not physiologically possible to be able to climb all out one day and come back the next stage and crush it on a time trial (sound familiar?). Even the best rider under the best conditions would crack on the time trial and possibly erase the gains in the mountains, if not fall out of GC contention. But the tour wants to see GC contenders go all out. The alternative is a boring tour where the GC contenders race super tactically to preserve themselves for the next stage. Thus, doping is seen as part of the sport and is not considered doping unless you get caught. If you get caught, then you got an advantage by doping too much. That is why guys like Lance and Landis can swear up and down that they did not dope. They do not consider it doping as long as they keep it within the boundaries of what everyone else is doing.

Landis solicited money to help with his defense by telling people he was clean. Could he be criminally charged w/ fraud for misrepresentation?

Amgen Tour of California

Sponsored by Amgen,

"Amgen, proud monopoly holder of erythropoietin (EPO) production"...

http://www.nature.com/nbt/journal/v19/n3/full/nbt0301_188.html

If Floyd's discussions of PEDs were as common as he says, you would think that he would have some record of this via email. If he had an actual email from Armstrong (or anyone else) about their drug use, it would be just as definitive as a positive drug test.

"This is exactly what Landis is trying to do. He is going to force Lance and Johan to sue him for defamation so his attorneys can put them under oath. There is a big difference between a positive test and a ban on cycling and hard time in the slammer for lying under oath."

Some of you may not know or recall that Lance was sued by a company and the judgment went in his favor. The team had taken out an "insurance" policy that if Lance won X number of Tours, the company would pay him some amount of money. (This is like the insurance on hole in one contests).

Lots of evidence and sworn testimony (under oath), Lance was acquitted.

So if you and I enter court. You say I did X, and I deny it. You have no witnesses or other supporting testimony. How am I going to be convicted of perjury? The only way is if you have more credibility than I do. In the case of Landis, I could destroy his credibility in court. "Jurors, he lied for 4 years about his drug use. Why should you believe him now."

Landis has no credibility, but at the same time I don't buy that he's implicating Lance just to "grab some publicity". It's obviously eating him up inside that Lance has gotten away with doping for so long while he and others keep getting busted, but I hope he's able to channel that frustration into something that will actually help expose the whole Bruyneel/Armstrong system. I mean, come on. Hamilton, Heras, Landis, Vinokourov, and those are just the big guys.