[lakeArrowheadrider]

If he would have come clean he could have the leader of Chipolte, Now maybe Rock racing if he is lucky? I doubt he will ever see the Tour again.

[Roadent]

He'll get hired again, no doubt: RR will pick him up. He'll feel right at home in next year's Tour of Columbia...

[smug]

yea, he'll have to start with a smaller team and work his way back up. the doping history is one thing, but the hip injury may also raise a few doubts. but winning races can change minds.

[Burkni]

yea, he'll have to start with a smaller team and work his way back up. the doping history is one thing, but the hip injury may also raise a few doubts. but winning races can change minds.

Or raise eyebrows.

[Ali]

Floyd did enough to at least raise doubts in the minds of most right-thinking people. The impression I get from even the most rabid anti-doping friends and acquaintances is "Well, he probably did it". The doubt is there because of the way he defended himself. It's difficult to reconcile that degree of commitment to the actions of a guilty person (check out most of the feedback from the guys he raced against off-road last year - I heard little condemnation of him - quite the opposite)

I don't see why returning to the TdF would be a priority. He already won that race and he's unlikely to beat Lance's record. A nice steady job on a pro team would be just the ticket.

[The Rake]

I don't see why returning to the TdF would be a priority. He already won that race and he's unlikely to beat Lance's record. A nice steady job on a pro team would be just the ticket.

No he didn't.


Oh b*******, I'd make a rubbish fish

[Ali]

No he didn't.
Oh b*******, I'd make a rubbish fish

Check this out ... I'm sure you'll appreciate the humor (quite British and sounds good too !)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iLdkz6HYBGg&NR=1

There's a message there somewhere ... but you need to watch it to the end to get the punchline

[The Rake]

Check this out ... I'm sure you'll appreciate the humor (quite British and sounds good too !)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iLdkz6HYBGg&NR=1

There's a message there somewhere ... but you need to watch it to the end to get the punchline

Got to get me some Radiohead bog roll

[smug]

Floyd did enough to at least raise doubts in the minds of most right-thinking people. The impression I get from even the most rabid anti-doping friends and acquaintances is "Well, he probably did it". The doubt is there because of the way he defended himself. It's difficult to reconcile that degree of commitment to the actions of a guilty person (check out most of the feedback from the guys he raced against off-road last year - I heard little condemnation of him - quite the opposite)

I don't see why returning to the TdF would be a priority. He already won that race and he's unlikely to beat Lance's record. A nice steady job on a pro team would be just the ticket.

cycling fans think all pro cyclists "probably" dope and ones with mountains of evidence like landis "obviously" doped.

[Ali]

cycling fans think all pro cyclists "probably" dope and ones with mountains of evidence like landis "obviously" doped.

That was the point I was making, sort of. I'd have expected that for the majority of fans, Floyd would have made that transition from "probably" to "obviously", but it just hasn't happened. The majority of observers make no distinction between him and other cyclists. For all the money and time that was spent pursuing his sanction, your average observer just kind of shrugs his/her shoulders, mutters "whatever" and then starts speculating which team he'll be riding for next year. Floyd hasn't been demonised for his alleged doping. Nobody cares.

[Ali]

w. tried to reply but your PM box must be full or something.

[Kiwi]

Floyd hasn't been demonised for his alleged doping. Nobody cares.

I suspect that a lot of fans care. It wasn't so much the doping - I mean, look at the redemption of David Millar - but the disingenuous defense campaign.

Landis, like Hamilton, will always have supporters. He'd be likely to have had more, though, if he'd confessed to cheating, fingered the network, and made a contribution to cleaning up cycling.

He might've even got an invite to Garmin and had the chance to contest the Tour again.

[Ali]

I suspect that a lot of fans care. It wasn't so much the doping - I mean, look at the redemption of David Millar - but the disingenuous defense campaign.

Landis, like Hamilton, will always have supporters. He'd be likely to have had more, though, if he'd confessed to cheating, fingered the network, and made a contribution to cleaning up cycling.

He might've even got an invite to Garmin and had the chance to contest the Tour again.

Yes, I can see where you're coming from, but you have to remember that this forum represents a very, very small cross-section of society. The majority opinion here (that Floyd doped and it's really important) actually represents the smallest of small minority opinions in the real world. Taken as a whole, that view is insignificant to the point of being negligably small. That's not to say you're not entitled to your opinion. Of course, I'd never suggest such a thing ... even if it does put you in the same camp as the "Elvis was abducted by aliens" crowd.

The rest of the world is highly sceptical about the USADA/CAS result. They may not be confident enough to declare that he definitely did not dope, but they have enough savvy to recognise when something isn't right. I suppose that's the great thing about forums like these ... minority groups can get together in a small, tight community and reaffirm their own, slightly quirky beliefs.

More power to you ... I respect your right to hold whatever opinion you wish.

Ali

[Surftel]

Yes, I can see where you're coming from, but you have to remember that this forum represents a very, very small cross-section of society. The majority opinion here (that Floyd doped and it's really important) actually represents the smallest of small minority opinions in the real world. Taken as a whole, that view is insignificant to the point of being negligably small. That's not to say you're not entitled to your opinion. Of course, I'd never suggest such a thing ... even if it does put you in the same camp as the "Elvis was abducted by aliens" crowd.

The rest of the world is highly sceptical about the USADA/CAS result. They may not be confident enough to declare that he definitely did not dope, but they have enough savvy to recognise when something isn't right. I suppose that's the great thing about forums like these ... minority groups can get together in a small, tight community and reaffirm their own, slightly quirky beliefs.

More power to you ... I respect your right to hold whatever opinion you wish.

Ali

While I am sure you would like the majority to share your narrow view the fact is most cycling fans think Floyd is a doper and a liar. It is only a small element that believes otherwise.

[Andrew]

Yes, I can see where you're coming from, but you have to remember that this forum represents a very, very small cross-section of society. The majority opinion here (that Floyd doped and it's really important) actually represents the smallest of small minority opinions in the real world. Taken as a whole, that view is insignificant to the point of being negligably small. That's not to say you're not entitled to your opinion. Of course, I'd never suggest such a thing ... even if it does put you in the same camp as the "Elvis was abducted by aliens" crowd.

The rest of the world is highly sceptical about the USADA/CAS result. They may not be confident enough to declare that he definitely did not dope, but they have enough savvy to recognise when something isn't right. I suppose that's the great thing about forums like these ... minority groups can get together in a small, tight community and reaffirm their own, slightly quirky beliefs.

More power to you ... I respect your right to hold whatever opinion you wish.

Ali

I don't mean to barge in here, but this seems like an extremely erroneous post. First of all, the only reason the majority of the posters here think it's important that Floyd doped is because he did it on cycling's largest stage--the huge (bad) publicity it generated made it important for the sport.

And as for how "the rest of the world" feels--well, the majority of the world doesn't care about cycling. That is, compared to either footballs, or basketball, the number of people who follow the sport closely is relatively small. I teach in America and I could count on one hand the number of students I've had whose knowledge of the sport goes beyond Lance's exploits in the Tour. I would say that in the world at large, the percentage of people who know that there was such a thing as a USADA/CAS result is tiny, miniscule. What most people know are the headlines: Floyd Landis wins Tour! Floyd Landis tests positive! Landis proclaims innocence! Landis found guilty! Landis appeals! Landis loses appeal. End of story. Especially when combined with a general belief (as reflected in the sports pages, and the jokes of bad late-night comedians) that, following all the scandals including Floyd's, all cyclists are on PEDs.

If by "the rest of the world" you mean all the people who seriously and passionately follow the sport, I think these forums and others are not such a bad barometer. When I go out Sunday morning group rides, and the conversation turns to cycling and drugs (before we hit the hills), there is no small amount of concern about the LNDD procedures--especially if there any scientists in the group. But I have heard very, very few people assert a strong belief in his innocence. Ever. And I travel, with my bike, a lot.

I guess my main objection to your post is the idea that there are millions of people on the planet who actually know and care enough about the science of FL's case to have a strong opinion--or any opinion at all. If you really think that's true, then you're the one who lives in a small, tight community with quirky beliefs.

[Andrew]

Addendum: to continue with my empirical data, my brother-in-law is a scientist and a cyclist, and rides with groups of colleagues (in America, France and Germany), and most of them have huge reservations about the LNDD procedures in the Landis case. So I would say that the majority of cyclist scientists think that the case against FL had serious flaws. But how many scientist cyclists are there in the world? Now that's a niche group if there ever was one.

[ZigZagged]

My 2 cents is that many if not most sports fans assume using steroids or enhancements of some type is "part of the job". Until recently that seems to have actually been the case for almost all sports.

The small cross section of the population that comes to my mind is that made up of people who look beyond the simple and uninformative headline "so and so tested positive" and explore the actual background. The larger cross section is made up of those who aren't so inquisitive and/or don't care.

This post has been edited by ZigZagged: 29 August 2008 - 09:39 PM

[Ali]

Addendum: to continue with my empirical data, my brother-in-law is a scientist and a cyclist, and rides with groups of colleagues (in America, France and Germany), and most of them have huge reservations about the LNDD procedures in the Landis case. So I would say that the majority of cyclist scientists think that the case against FL had serious flaws. But how many scientist cyclists are there in the world? Now that's a niche group if there ever was one.

Andrew,

Let me summarise what you said (and please correct me if I'm wrong).

Amongst the general population, Floyd is an American hero. He won the Tour de France and if they met him in the street, they'd be asking for his autograph. Would they ? ... I know they would !

Amongst the niche group who are best placed to assess the case and the evidence, the guys who actually understand all the funky science, the general opinion is that LNDD suck. They are seriously concerned about what LNDD did. Would any of this niche group personally underwrite the LNDD results ? No way ! Would they come out and say Floyd is innocent ? Well, "that can't be proven" would be the general response (what I'm saying here is that bad science can't be used for anything, least of all contradicting the results which the bad science points toward !).

Now, I know that most of the people who post here don't fall into this small, highly educated, niche group (with obvious exceptions like myself), so why would you rate their opinions higher than those who actually understand the science ?

[Roadent]

Yes, I can see where you're coming from, but you have to remember that this forum represents a very, very small cross-section of society. The majority opinion here (that Floyd doped and it's really important) actually represents the smallest of small minority opinions in the real world. Taken as a whole, that view is insignificant to the point of being negligably small. That's not to say you're not entitled to your opinion. Of course, I'd never suggest such a thing ... even if it does put you in the same camp as the "Elvis was abducted by aliens" crowd.

The rest of the world is highly sceptical about the USADA/CAS result. They may not be confident enough to declare that he definitely did not dope, but they have enough savvy to recognise when something isn't right. I suppose that's the great thing about forums like these ... minority groups can get together in a small, tight community and reaffirm their own, slightly quirky beliefs.

More power to you ... I respect your right to hold whatever opinion you wish.

Ali

Is really the Ali we know? No convoluted, post-modern dissemblings and evasions? Just a feeble attempt to shore up his vanishingly small minority opinion....? Although, it does sound as if the cheque from Ffflyod might not have bounced. Does being popular and grabbing headlines mean that you're more likely to be innocent? Strange attitude...Face it, the people that have interest in this case (everybody here, and the majority of serious cyclists) have, to Andrew's points, real issues with Ffflyod; issues that don't discount their attitudes about the quality of testing and testing facilities.

[Andrew]

quote name='Ali'
Andrew,

Let me summarise what you said (and please correct me if I'm wrong).

Amongst the general population, Floyd is an American hero. He won the Tour de France and if they met him in the street, they'd be asking for his autograph. Would they ? ... I know they would !

No, they wouldn't. For the majority of Americans, Floyd is a convicted doper. Americans can be celebrity-obsessed and would be glad to shake the hand of a famous person, and get his autograph. But to think they might be aware of the scientific complexities of this case is slightly crazy. Americans know cycling as a sport where people dope to win. Floyd doped, won, and got caught. End of story.

Amongst the niche group who are best placed to assess the case and the evidence, the guys who actually understand all the funky science, the general opinion is that LNDD suck. They are seriously concerned about what LNDD did. Would any of this niche group personally underwrite the LNDD results ? No way ! Would they come out and say Floyd is innocent ? Well, "that can't be proven" would be the general response (what I'm saying here is that bad science can't be used for anything, least of all contradicting the results which the bad science points toward !).

Here you have correctly summarized my opinion.

Now, I know that most of the people who post here don't fall into this small, highly educated, niche group (with obvious exceptions like myself), so why would you rate their opinions higher than those who actually understand the science ?

I don't. What I was objecting to was your assertion that the majority of people out there ("the rest of the world") think the case against Floyd is weak. There are a specialized few--an informed specialized few, true--who have serious reservations about the case--but the general opinion among the not very many people who care about the case at all is that Floyd is a doper who got caught.

Thanks,

Andrew

This post has been edited by Andrew: 29 August 2008 - 04:54 PM