Floyd vs the world - II

[SimonD]

"Floyd Landis, the American cyclist whose 2006 Tour De France victory was nullified after a positive doping test, has sent a series of emails to cycling officials and sponsors admitting to, and detailing, his systematic use of performance enhancing drugs during his career. The emails also claim that other riders and cycling officials allegedly participated in doping, including seven-time Tour de France winner Lance Armstrong."

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703691804575255410855321120.html?m od=rss_whats_news_us

[Driver]

Is it just me or do other people get that feeling of resentment every time they see Vino pull on the pink jersey?

I still want to believe LA is clean. Maybe wishful thinking but my status as 'a huge fan' would be reversed if it was proven.

Stay clean Cadel.

[Startrek]

Is it just me or do other people get that feeling of resentment every time they see Vino pull on the pink jersey?

I still want to believe LA is clean. Maybe wishful thinking but my status as 'a huge fan' would be reversed if it was proven.

Stay clean Cadel.


Big ditto

[SimonD]

Is it just me or do other people get that feeling of resentment every time they see Vino pull on the pink jersey?


Might not be an issue after last nights stage! It is really tough when riders come back without having come clean in the first place. What to think? Assuming he did dope, I do believe a lot of those he raced over the main part of his career did the same. It's a pity as he's such a great racer - there is never a null stage in a tour when he's around.

On Lance, I really can't see this sticking (as much as it would seem just for the Ullrich fans!) unless Floyd has some hard evidence. Even if the claims are true, Lance has an industry and millions behind him, as well as some very powerful stakeholders. Testimony won't be anywhere near enough, surely.

[SimonD]

http://sports.espn.go.com/oly/cycling/news/story?id=5203604&campaign=rss&source=ESPNHeadlines

"He added that he has no documentation for many of the claims he is making about other riders or officials, and that it will be his word against theirs."

Landis "had kept detailed training journals since he was a teenager. He said he continued the same methodical record-keeping once he started using banned drugs and techniques. Landis said he spent as much as $90,000 a year on performance-enhancing drugs and on consultants to help him build a training regime. Landis said he has kept all of his journals and diaries and has offered to share them with U.S. anti-doping authorities in recent meetings."

[Ross]

So what does Landis have to gain by trying to bring down all these other big name cyclists? Nothing I would assume, only going to make enemies of the other riders and officials regardless of if his allegations are true or not.

[SimonD]

Cyclingnews.com have finally got their take up, after their earlier teaser: http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/landis-confesses-to-doping-implicates-armstrong-and-bruyneel Much more carefully worded than some of the other reports.

[Bean]

During the meanwhilst...

http://www.sbs.com.au/cyclingcentral/news/11392/Armstrong-crashes-out-of-Tour-of-California

[bosworth*]

Notice all the other riders trying to keep Omerta alive, in response to Landis' confessions.

[SimonD]

I think that was the predictable response though. Who's going to go, "oh, yeah that's true actually." Despite all the excitment on the cyclingnews forum, it'll surely be status quo unless some non-sporting body decides to do a proper investigation. And even then there'd be politics...

[SimonD]

By the way, Vino made another 10 seconds last night.

And in other dope updates from the CN forum, USA cycling don't reckon they can say if they suspended Levi for ephedra in 1996 - seems a bit bizarre.

Here's the email Joe Papp posted http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showthread.php?t=7096&page=27

"From: Smith, Andrea [mailto:asmith@usacycling.org]
Sent: Monday, May 03, 2010 5:47 PM
To: Joe Papp
Subject: RE: Levi Leipheimer 1996 doping suspension confirmation

Hi Joe-
We have changed legal counsel and moved offices in the many years since 1996, so we do not have any records on site. In any event, if we are able to locate any archives we would need Leipheimer’s express permission to share information. Before we undertake the effort necessary to search for these records it would make your (and our) task easier if you could get the records directly from him or at least get a release from Mr. Leipheimer.
Thanks.

-Andrea

From: Joe Papp [mailto:joe@joepapp.com]
Sent: Friday, April 30, 2010 1:35 PM
To: Smith, Andrea
Subject: RE: Levi Leipheimer 1996 doping suspension confirmation

Thanks, Andrea. I appreciate your looking into this. I’d also like to know if the suspension was appealed, and if so, whether or not it was upheld, modified, rejected, etc. and who was named national criterium champion in L.L.’s place.

Best,

Joe

From: Smith, Andrea [mailto:asmith@usacycling.org]
Sent: Friday, April 30, 2010 3:09 PM
To: Joe Papp
Cc: Kahn, Keri
Subject: RE: Levi Leipheimer 1996 doping suspension confirmation

Hi Joe-
That was quite a while ago. I’ll see if I can look into it and let you know.

-Andrea

From: Joe Papp [mailto:joe@joepapp.com]
Sent: Thursday, April 29, 2010 10:39 PM
To: Smith, Andrea
Cc: Kahn, Keri
Subject: Levi Leipheimer 1996 doping suspension confirmation

Hi Andrea, Keri –

I’m writing a story for publication concerning Levi Leipheimer, and need USA Cycling to confirm his initial suspension in 1996 for doping, after he tested positive at the US National Criterium Championship in Ohio on August 18, 1996. The news release, text of which follows below, would have been sent out in early-October, I believe:

A USA Cycling disciplinary panel recommended that Levi Leipheimer receive a three-month suspension as a result of a violation of Bylaw N., Section 2, Part 4, Prohibited Practices, stemming from competition at the USCF Amateur Men's Criterium Championship, Aug. 18 in Grandview Heights, Ohio. That recommendation has been upheld by Lisa Voight, USA Cycling executive director. The 23-year- old Leipheimer will be required to return his national championship jersey, medal and prize money. He will also be suspended from the U.S. National Team for the same period. The decision is subject to appeal.

... "

[bosworth*]

CT said:

In my opinion, Lance has done more good for cycling and cancer than almost anyone else in the world and I hope nothing comes out of this. Was Lance ever racing dirty? I don’t think it matters. Look at the dodgy guys he beat in seven Tours. Dirty or clean it’s an amazing feat. We can’t go putting question marks on every great sporting achievement in the past. No good could come out of Landis’ allegations uncovering anything negative. Too many cancer victims have put hope on the Lance Armstrong story and he’s made cycling more popular than ever. Love him or hate him, the Lance Armstrong Corp. cannot have this happen.


so, honesty or pragmatism, which do you prefer?

[SimonD]

so, honesty or pragmatism, which do you prefer?

That perhaps sums it up best.

[bosworth*]

Like Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the Armstrong brand is "Too big to fail (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Too_Big_to_Fail)"

[Bean]

Like Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the Armstrong brand is "Too big to fail (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Too_Big_to_Fail)"

Too true. ATM I can see this going either way... either under the carpet and Landis disappears for good, or one enormous upset for Armstrong, the UCI and many other pro's. Could be the GFC of cycling.

[bosworth*]

according to CT, Lance won’t be racing the Tour this year ?

?????????

http://www.cyclingtipsblog.com/2010/05/landis-goes-postal/

[SimonD]

Well CT and his commenters certainly have their heads in the sand. Though the blog usually steers away from saying anything controversial or critical, probably because Wade doesn't want to bite the hands that feed him and is in the national scene himself. So probably not the best place for criticism of the status quo.

[dadcram]

We knew Landis was bent! (http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_wb8bAl1P-N0/SQHAn9NKs_I/AAAAAAAADbY/r1uTSfuuVk4/s1600-h/landis+bent.jpg)

[SimonD]

More and more interesting with Lance and co publishing the emails Floyd sent them. The strange thing is they are all consistent with Floyd's story, not the blackmail attempts Johan was accusing him of. I don't know if there are more that haven't been made public, but it's curious that they published these...

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/22/sports/cycling/22cycling.html?pagewanted=2

[bosworth*]

The Landis case gains momentum:

http://www.spaziociclismo.it/?action=read&idnotizia=3105

Landis case, l' former wife of Armstrong collaborates to surveyings

As we had anticipated this morning, some persons have decided to collaborate to surveyings left after the declarations of Floyd Landis. According to the Sunday Times, one of they would be l' former wife of Lance Armstrong, Kristen, that she has decided to collaborate with Novitzky, he who takes care itself of surveyings. L' former Mrs. Armstrong has been pulled in dance dall' former runner of the Phonak as it would have been present when l' runner of the RadioShack puts into effect them would have supplied to Landis the testosterone, in 2001, and l' EPO, in 2003.


Caso Landis, l'ex moglie di Armstrong collabora alle indagini

Come avevamo anticipato questa mattina, alcune persone hanno deciso di collaborare alle indagini partite dopo le dichiarazioni di Floyd Landis. Secondo il Sunday Times, una di esse sarebbe l'ex moglie di Lance Armstrong, Kristen, che ha deciso di collaborare con Novitzky, colui che si occupa delle indagini.
L'ex Signora Armstrong è stata tirata in ballo dall'ex corridore della Phonak in quanto sarebbe stata presente quando l'attuale corridore della RadioShack avrebbe fornito a Landis il testosterone, nel 2001, e l'EPO, nel 2003.

[SimonD]

It all seems to be "x has reported that" so far.

Though i did read this so she might be a bit aggrieved if it's true! Lance is one hell of a serial monogamist.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/sport/more_sport/cycling/article7133884.ece?token=null&offset=12&page=2
"It was the spring of 2004, the Armstrongs had separated, Lance had hooked up with the singer Sheryl Crow and was taking her to the Girona apartment for the first time. According to Anderson, who was in Girona ahead of his boss, Armstrong called and asked him to go through the apartment and “de-Kik” it [Armstrong referred to his former wife as Kik]. While doing that task, Anderson claimed he found a small bottle in a medical cabinet that had the label “Androstenin”, and after looking up the list of banned products on his laptop, he was sure his boss was doping. Their relationship was never the same after that."

[Ross]

But it's just hearsay ATM. Kristin being Lance's ex would most likely have an axe to grind so would her (or Landis') comments/accusations really hold any credibility or weight? Unless Lance or anybody else actually fails a drug test then anything anybody has to say is not worth hearing.

It's like if I went to the police station and said I saw Simon Dwyer drive his car/ride his bike through 10 red lights - the cops would say "until we see him do it there is nothing we can do".

The UCI or whoever takes care of this isn't really going to want to 'out' Lance anyway, it would make them and their drug testing procedures a farce. And if UCI officials are implicated as taking bribes and this is found to be true then that makes them look extra bad and could open up a whole new can of litigation type worms.

[RobF]

Dwyer rides through red lights? I never would have suspected.

[j_young_80]

He once called me and asked me to "De-Green" Northbourne.

[Driver]

I have seen Dwyer commit heinous acts.... of tweed

[Driver]

After yesterdays effort I'll put my hand up for a compact.

Seems that every dam RR in this town involves a large hill.

[bosworth*]

But it's just hearsay ATM. Kristin being Lance's ex would most likely have an axe to grind so would her (or Landis') comments/accusations really hold any credibility or weight? Unless Lance or anybody else actually fails a drug test then anything anybody has to say is not worth hearing.

It's like if I went to the police station and said I saw Simon Dwyer drive his car/ride his bike through 10 red lights - the cops would say "until we see him do it there is nothing we can do".


A claim is true or false on it's own merits, it doesn't matter who says it.

The most reliable source can say something false and it is still false, and the dodgiest source can say something true and it is still true.

All this noise from Armstrong and his shills about Landis' reliability is merely a distraction, so that they don't have to consider the claims that have been made.

[tor.lattimore]

A claim is true or false on it's own merits, it doesn't matter who says it.


No, a claim is (usually) simply either true, or false. Someone claiming it to be true based on what they have seen/heard or experienced adds weight to the likelihood that it is true. The amount it adds clearly depends on the credibility and motivations of that person.

Of course, non circumstantial evidence is even better.

[SimonD]

No, a claim is (usually) simply either true, or false. Someone claiming it to be true based on what they have seen/heard or experienced adds weight to the likelihood that it is true. The amount it adds clearly depends on the credibility and motivations of that person.

Of course, non circumstantial evidence is even better.

I don't quite understand how this disagrees with Boz...? If all dogs are brown, it is true whether or not Jimmy says some dogs are grey. But we might use what Jimmy says as a basis for what we believe. Or he might just raise the question we want to investigate.

As Rosco says, I don't think anything can come of the accusations of themselves. People with greater integrity and no obvious reason to lie have implicated Armstrong before and of course that study found EPO in what turned out to be his 1999 samples (there was no testing for EPO until 2001, I think). But nothing have come out of those allegations either.

(Although was there an investigation by his insurance company or something that wound up in court?? I think most of his court cases ended up settled.)

More likely they will be the basis for an investigation by some other body, with this being the well documented (in Landis's diaries) and most detailed. The FDA has been suggested, apparently lead by a guy who headed the BALCO investigation of Marion Jones etc. But the FDA haven't confirmed that. Someone suggested on the cyclingnews forum that Landis (and team?) were actually pretty clever in implicating all the cycling bodies, meaning the responsibility of any investigation would need to fall to someone else.

Landis's testimony and records would likely form part of the evidence in that investigation.

Though I'm no expert on the matter, that's just my understanding...

[Chris]

I have seen Dwyer commit heinous acts.... of tweed

In fact I saw him tweeding him up this morning.

[Simonsky]

A claim is true or false on it's own merits, it doesn't matter who says it.

The most reliable source can say something false and it is still false, and the dodgiest source can say something true and it is still true.

All this noise from Armstrong and his shills about Landis' reliability is merely a distraction, so that they don't have to consider the claims that have been made.

That's true. All these claims that I hear about Bozzie being an honourable rider...????:wtf:

[bosworth*]

the scandal rolls on

http://cozybeehive.blogspot.com/2010/05/open-letter-to-uci-president-pat.html

[SimonD]

Looks like some sort of investigation is going ahead. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/26/sports/cycling/26cycling.html?src=twt&twt=nytimes

[DGKP]

Maybe old news but one of those accused by Landis is Matthew White and the UCI has asked CA to investigate.

http://www.sbs.com.au/cyclingcentral/news/11652/UCI-claims-no-conflict-in-Armstrong-donation

[SimonD]

Hmm, I suspect not much will come of any cycling body investigations. They don't have enough resources or power (or the will?) to get into things this old. And Matt White probably won't be a big fish in any FDA investigation either.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2010/magazine/05/25/lance.armstrong/
'As for Landis's claim that he (Lance) received EPO in her presence, Kristin (Armstrong, the ex-wife) wrote (by SMS), "I don't remember that."'

Why not say "no"???

[Ross]

'As for Landis's claim that he (Lance) received EPO in her presence, Kristin (Armstrong, the ex-wife) wrote (by SMS), "I don't remember that."'

Why not say "no"???

Never say never!

Maybe she is in training for a future career in politics?

Have to say it isn't looking too good for the sport of professional cycling, it may be about to implode. There are plenty of other professional cyclists apart from Lance, hope they are all investigated equally.

*hypothetical question*
I wonder if Lance is found guilty will he have to repay prize money and be stripped of TdF title(s)?

[SimonD]

Haha, yeah, sounds like a few pollies I can think of.

Floyd named several, but I guess Lance is the big fish. If it turns out the biggest cyclist of the last 15 years and the governing body have cheated, then that's pretty big. Cycling will go on, because it's a great sport. People will always watch and follow it for it's mini-epics. Worst case if this stuff is true is that it's gutted and has to start from scratch, but with so much sponsorship money it will.

To the hypothetical, probably not. Who would they give the titles to? Ullrich? Basso? Riis, Ullrich and Pantani all still have their TdF titles.

[So_Far]

I though this was a great piece on the subject:
http://www.cycle-smart.com/blog/2010/05/20/pretty-boy-floyd

"So burn down Babylon. Burn pro cycling down. There will still be racing, there will still be races. Burn it down, so we can build it up again new. I condemn Landis' original decision to participate in a corrupt, immoral system. But I'll stand in front of the flames with him and watch it burn."

[j_young_80]

There is some hate flying for that guy in the comments Rob, in reading half of them I question why I hate people like Vino and Ricco, but seem to forgive Millar more easily (my Scottish heritage no doubt helped his cause).

Before i'd ever raced a road bike, i'd heard on the news about Landis ripping back 13 minutes on GC in the TDF and that was without knowing what GC really was. Then it turned out the amazing story was just a bloke on drugs but frankly not being into cycling it didn't really phase me all that much.

Later after actually getting into cycling and watching and admiring guys like Ricco's aggressive racing, then finding out they were on the juice pissed me off because i'd been singing their praises. I remember watching Vino in the Saxo doco (overcoming?) and empathising with him, only to find out he too was full of sh!t.

All this Landis rubbish flying around currently is really detracting from some sensational racing going on at the moment (look at the contributions to this thread versus the Giro and Tour of Cali - which an Aussie/Canberran won) and the guy quite frankly is a tosser. He got busted, everyone else didnt. You pull back 13 minutes on the whole field in the pinnacle of racing and the spotlight is likely to come your way. You don't spend 2 years saying you are innocent (and as pointed out in Rob's link, ask for donations to support your court case) and then when you realise you have a fork in your arse and are done start singing like a canary.

Rant over, flame suit on. All you haters suck Landis's calls.

Fellow professional and 10 time Tour de France cyclist, Australian Stuart O'Grady (http://www.vikingscyclingforum.org.au/wiki/Stuart_O%27Grady), left no doubt as to his view in an interview for the Australian 60 Minutes program televised on 22 July 2007. The reporter Liz Hayes asked O'Grady: "Would anyone have picked that — that the winner of last year's race was a drug cheat?" O'Grady replied,
<TABLE style="BORDER-BOTTOM-STYLE: none; BORDER-RIGHT-STYLE: none; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent; BORDER-COLLAPSE: collapse; BORDER-TOP-STYLE: none; BORDER-LEFT-STYLE: none" class=cquote2 align=center><TBODY><TR><TD style="TEXT-ALIGN: left; PADDING-BOTTOM: 10px; PADDING-LEFT: 10px; PADDING-RIGHT: 10px; FONT-FAMILY: serif; COLOR: #b2b7f2; FONT-SIZE: 40px; FONT-WEIGHT: bold; PADDING-TOP: 10px" vAlign=top width=20>“</TD><TD style="PADDING-BOTTOM: 4px; PADDING-LEFT: 10px; PADDING-RIGHT: 10px; PADDING-TOP: 4px" vAlign=top>"I would have, because I was there with him that day when he was in that breakaway. I was actually 13 minutes ahead of him and he caught us on his own and then he basically rode us all off the wheel..... I thought that was impossible, what he did. I'm not a bad bike rider and, you know, he made me look like a little kid."<SUP id=cite_ref-34 class=reference>[35] (http://www.vikingscyclingforum.org.au/forum/#cite_note-34)</SUP></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

[bosworth*]

Here is a great argument that I read earlier:

facts:
(1) professional cyclists/directors/owners/doctors are in one of two groups: those that have doped, and those that have never doped.
(2) everyone denies doping
(3) Those that have never doped do not know any specific details about those that have doepd.


conclusions:
(4) Whenever someone makes detailed accusations about doping, they must have doped themselves, and their accusations demonstrate that they have lied previously. The accusations must necessarily come with a confession.

(5) It is impossible to find a (cycling-doping) whistleblower that has not lied in the past.

[bosworth*]

This ^^^^ is why the "he has no credibility" response to Landis' accusations is meaningless.

It is impossible for a whistleblower to have credibility.

[Kano]

conclusions:
(4) Whenever someone makes detailed accusations about doping, they must have doped themselves, and their accusations demonstrate that they have lied previously. The accusations must necessarily come with a confession.
.


i find that hard to agree with Bos ( maybe because you posted it). Just because somebody is aware of a process does not convict them of the crime......
I, in theory, know how to rob a bank and if had nothing better to do i could give you a run down on how it would go down, does that make me a bank robber? no

[bosworth*]

I'm talking about detailed accusations such as:

"on XXXX date, between 13.00 and 14.00, the team doctor visited the team in the hotel room of XXXX hotel, and gave blood transfusions to XXX, XXX and XXXX"

[Kano]

Bos..

he has made an accusation...cool...he gave some details....so what

still does not mean he is doing it aswell....sure the chances are he did,
thats different to it being a fact though

[SimonD]

Pos rep to Boz for bringing in some formal logic! If you can convert it to symbolic form to prove that the conclusion necessarily follows from the premises, I will reinstate you rep power!

I think the argument is perfectly valid, but I too would debate the third premise. When Cadel was on T-Mobile, he probably knew the rest of the team visited Frieberg for some blood work on a particular date. But seeing as Jan didn't like him, he wasn't invited so didn't get to dope.

But I get the point, even though it might not be sound.

[Kano]

so Cadel would be able to provide the same sort of details as the example Bos gave..

which is my point, i would not say Cadel did it.

[RobF]

and hence Bos is kind of right - Cadel would have previously covered up doping by others.

also, this is an excellent friday afternoon game.

Kano, can we start a Robabank Squad, given that you may be a bank robber? I propose a snazzy orange and blue kit.

[SimonD]

How do people react to comments like these from David Millar? And others who have absolutely stuck the boot in like the Radioshack "deranged" line?

it just makes me feel that it is rotten to the core. As Boz says: Omerta. Defend it, say it was an individual decision and you'll be welcomed back. Break the rules and reveal what goes on and you'll never ride again.

http://www.denverpost.com/sports/ci_15175682?
"He's reached the end of the road and I just find it disgusting," said Millar from his home training base in Girona, Spain. "He's a liar and a cheat and he has nothing left in cycling so he just wants to burn the house down."

After Landis' ban four years ago, Millar said he tried calling him to give advice on how to return to the sport. He never received a return call.

"If he had stood up and manned up four years ago, he'd be racing the Tour de France now," Millar said. "He'd have a different book out. He'd have not lost a penny. He'd be admired by young people. He would have a different life ahead of him. He'd be in a decent mental state. He'd be sober.

"And he'd be married."

However, many in cycling believe doping was widespread in the early 2000s. How does anyone know Landis is lying?

"That's the problem," Millar said. "Now he's lost the ability to tell the truth whether it is or not. That's what's despicable about it - and sad. Because I'm sure there's truth in some of it. But it doesn't mean anything anymore."

[Startrek]

The boy that cried Wolf .

[Ross]

See my original post with the analogy of Simon going through red lights. Every single pro cyclist in the world can stand up and swear on a stack of bibles and have polygraph tests or whatever and say that Lance was/is a doper but UNLESS HE IS PROVEN POSITIVE BY UCI WITH A DRUG TEST THEN THESE ACCUSATIONS ARE MEANINGLESS. Circumstantial evidence at best, not enough to convict someone. Like saying Simon was seen near the traffic light when it was red so he must of gone through it!

Surely the credibility (or lack of) of these accusers/witnesses must be taken into account. It would be natural for Lance to make enemies of some of the other cyclists - after all he smashed some of them in multiple TdFs and who knows how many other races - and Lance does come across as arrogant (which I think can be excused to some extent because of his cycling talent - chemically enhanced or not) which is another reason for people to dislike him. If Simon beat me in every race (which he does...) and talked down and trash talked me then I probably wouldn't like him much and could easily make up some stuff about him as a 'pay back'. Then of course there was his ex-wife. How many people are still on good terms with their ex-partners? Not too many.

How can they prove what happened last year or the year before unless they retest the samples - this has already been done and the evidence dismissed because potentially the samples could of been tampered with. Wouldn't Lance trot this card out again if they retested old samples?

[SimonD]

I sure there are a few out there who could save you the trouble of making stuff up...

Again, I think you're correct in that nothing so far is solid enough. But that's why an investigation by someone (FDA or whoever it is) with more investigative power is going ahead. They'll presumably be able to look at records and DNA which are not available to the testing agencies.

A couple of points of clarification, though I agree not knock out blows:
-In 1999 Lance tested positive to a corticosteriod, but later produced a Therapeutic Use Exemption certificate which should have been presented before. Some claim it was backdated by his Dr.
-The 7 EPO samples from were tested as part of a study comparing detection methods. They were only known by their code, although it would be pretty obvious that Lance would have dominated the samples from that year. The test is pretty conservative - the presence of synthetic EPO isn't enough. It has to be a certain ratio of natural EPO. The newspaper l'Equipe found out and asked for Lance's testing records to be released to them. Lance OKed because he hadn't been found positive for anything. But they were able to match the sample codes for the positive samples in the study to him. As the tests were only done for scientific purposes, no sanction or investigation could come of them.

The story is here, which is pretty interesting:
http://nyvelocity.com/content/interviews/2009/michael-ashenden
http://nyvelocity.com/content/features/2009/spiking-armstrongs-99-samples

As a criticism, I'm pretty crap at lab work, but I don't see why this bit below by Ashendon can't be achieved by dilution. Pipetting more than 1 microlitre (ie if the EPO was diluted 10 times) is fairly consistent.

"The concentration of commercial EPO is around 20,000 UI per 0.6ml of injection. So if you wanted to add 0.0037674 UI you would add 0.000000113 ml (i.e., 0.6ml divided by 20,000/0.0037674 = 0.000000113 ml) of the synthetic EPO solution. This is 0.113 microlitres.

Let's now try and manipulate that same sample to arrive at 95% basic isoforms. You would need .95 x 0.0042 UI = 0.00399 UI. At a concentration of 20,000UI per 0.6ml you would need 0.000000126 ml. This is 0.126 microlitres.

So 0.000000113 ml gives you 89.7% and 0.000000126 ml gives you 95%. Good luck finding a pipette able to get down to that level of accuracy so you could inject the corresponding amount.... Remember 1 microlitre is one millionth of a litre, so you want to get your accuracy down to less than 1 ten millionth of a litre."

[So_Far]

yep, serial dilution ftw. If immunologists can do it, anyone can.

I just spent the last 4 hours injecting single cells each with 15 nL of solution however, so don't discount the power of the microinjector!

[bosworth*]

yep, serial dilution ftl. If homeopaths can do it, anyone can.

[Ross]

http://www.smh.com.au/sport/will-the-mud-stick-to-armstrong-20100528-wlg6.html

Will the mud stick to Armstrong?
PETER FITZSIMONS
May 29, 2010

For years TFF has made snide remarks at all those who lionise Lance Armstrong as a paragon of virtue, an amazingly drug-free athlete who somehow managed to defy all logic and win the Tour de France a record seven consecutive times in the world's most drug-corrupted sport, leaving the cheats in his sainted wake. Last week, however, we had the American's former teammate Floyd Landis alleging Armstrong not only used the illegal blood-booster EPO but that he was an oracle on the subject. Landis lost his 2006 Tour de France title after a positive drug test and was banned from the sport for two years, despite repeatedly claiming he was innocent. He has now admitted to drug use beginning in June 2002 and continuing through his Tour de France victory, and alleges that in 2003 he put his own blood bags in the same fridge in Armstrong's apartment where ''Mr Clean'' allegedly kept his. Armstrong's only real comeback to this devastating account was that this all about credibility, in other words ''it's our word against his''. Good. In my opinion, it's obvious that Landis's word, a verbal hara-kiri shattering his own protestations of innocence over the years, is worth a lot, while Armstrong's denials are very much in the category of ''he would say that, wouldn't he?''.

ARMSTRONG II

The good news for Armstrong, though, is this Monday, Sports Illustrated will detail how the world's most famous cyclist will soon face a US Federal probe from the same human hound dog who successfully led the BALCO probe. This means that Mr Clean will be able to answer other accusations over the years, including:

❏ Allegations by Armstrong's former masseuse, Emma O'Reilly, who claimed that in the late 1990s Armstrong on one occasion asked her to get rid of some used syringes, and she also had to give him make-up to conceal the needle marks on his arms.

❏ The report in 2005, from the highly reputable French newspaper, blood-booster , which alleged that no fewer than six urine samples taken from Armstrong during the 1999 Tour de France, to be frozen and stored, had since tested positive for EPO.

❏ He can explain why, in October 2008, he declined the opportunity to have the samples taken during the 1998 and 1999 Tours de France retested.

Let's hope that Armstrong takes the opportunity of at least co-operating fully with this federal investigator to once and for all prove his innocence. My own feeling is best encapsulated by the French writer: ''The truth is on the march, and nothing shall stop it …''

[Bean]

LeMond pushes:

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/lemond-reaffirms-support-for-landis

[SimonD]

Latest: http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/more_sports/2010/06/09/2010-06-09_government_assigns_federal_prosecutor_doug_mill er_to_cycling_case_sparked_by_flo.html

"the [US] government has assigned the case to Doug Miller, an experienced federal prosecutor who played a small but hardnosed role in the BALCO saga.

An assistant U.S. Attorney based in Los Angeles, Miller is standing behind the probe now being conducted by Food and Drug Administration criminal investigator Jeff Novitzky, according to multiple sources."

[Bean]

Latest:

http://www.sbs.com.au/cyclingcentral/news/14952/Reports-raise-more-Armstrong-allegations

[bosworth*]

who is the anonymous us-postal rider in the latest article?



http://www.sbs.com.au/cyclingcentral/news/14952/Reports-raise-more-Armstrong-allegations

[Bean]

Hincapie??

[SimonD]

Very interesting times. I just hope after all this there is a satisfactory answer one way or the other and we're not left wondering forever.

[Bean]

Latest news: http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/italian-police-meet-with-novitzky-in-lyon

Looks like Popovych is under some scrutiny now.

[SimonD]

Sports Illustrated makes some claims that Lance won't like.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/more/01/18/lance.armstrong/index.html?eref=sihp