Landis: "I won't be back" Options

[VdB]

When I translated it, I thought the end was also confusing, but that is what it says....

Maybe VDB can chim in, do you have the Gazet or het laatste nieuws? I couldn't find anything on their websites, so it was in the printed edition I assume.....

I have the copy of GVA lying around here, I'll give it a quick re-read and summarize what Floyd says in it. Just to try and clear this up.

[ZigZag]

quote Chris T 'I don't want to press the point, but you read about spending down "net worth" and the importance of money, it seems it is a very American persepctive. A foreign perspective might consider it gauche.'

Chris, my point is this- say what you will, but once you include bigoted thinking in your arguments the arguments themselves become secondary. Mods have rightfully made a point to posters not to use the word "French" in a denigrating manner (some tend to say "French" lab instead of LNDD). Racist, bigoted and prejudicial statements don't enhance one's believability.

I may have missed something, but what is this about a Landis defense fund? Last time I checked it didn't exist. Every time someone has mentioned it, the fund's existence has been denied (that I have seen). I may be wrong and anybody correct me if I am. On the other hand, it wouldn't bother me if there was a fund. But I have missed any news confirming said fund.

last paragraph deleted by mod.

[chris t]

Chris, my point is this- say what you will, but once you include bigoted thinking in your arguments the arguments themselves become secondary. Mods have rightfully made a point to posters not to use the word "French" in a denigrating manner (some tend to say "French" lab instead of LNDD). Racist, bigoted and prejudicial statements don't enhance one's believability.

bigoted? ironic

I made relevant points.

Floyd has good earning power in the future, no matter what occurs with this hearing. Thus, his requirements to appeal to the public for funds, is weak. It could be seen as more an obfuscation on the "unfairness" of the process.

Is it bigoted of me to suggest Floyd will be comfortable in his life in terms of a healthy income if he manages his affairs well? Is it bigoted of me therefore to suggest that relying on public funds lends a criticism his defense and personal actions lack principle and credibility? Is it bigoted of me to suggest that when someone talks of "their" wealth being drawn down could be perceived as gauche when on a simple relative scale Floyd has "more" than "less" in America. He has good earning power, I guarantee you Floyd should be able to earn multiple six figures with a decent management team. I never said Floyd has more than folks in Africa, but if you want to get into absurd arguments, and all of you folks contend I am bigoted, heck, lets ramp up our arguments to shrill proportions fools.

If Floyd does not solicit funds, much of what I wrote is moot, and I have already been into this comprehensively, and I don't want to harp.

I may have missed something, but what is this about a Landis defense fund? Last time I checked it didn't exist. Every time someone has mentioned it, the fund's existence has been denied (that I have seen). I may be wrong and anybody correct me if I am. On the other hand, it wouldn't bother me if there was a fund. But I have missed any news confirming said fund.

See before, Floyd has never denied the possibility and indeed he has raised that public aid solicitation with ambiguity over implementation.

ZZ, you need to read over some more discussions and be less inclined to hand out epithets such as bigoted with such alacrity.

[Thomas A. Fine]

I find this argument misleading at best. For one thing, we know that cyclists frequently dope and still pass the controls. There is no guarentee of being caught. Moreover it isn't as if Landis didn't have anything to gain from doping--there was in fact quite a bit at stake.

We DON'T know this. We don't we don't we don't. Wrong wrong wrong.

It' s frustrating the degree to which people believe this, in the face of allegations from a very few who themselves can not possible know how many cyclists actually dope. They can only rationalize their own behaviour by BELIEVING that many other cyclists dope.

There is a possible view of the world that exists, in which the vast majority of cyclists are not experts in doping, and in which they would believe that what Floyd said is true, that doping is likely going to lead to getting caught. The only "evidence" anyone carries that this is not true is preconceived notions, based on rumors and speculation.

tom

[amifan]

We DON'T know this. We don't we don't we don't. Wrong wrong wrong.

It' s frustrating the degree to which people believe this, in the face of allegations from a very few who themselves can not possible know how many cyclists actually dope. They can only rationalize their own behaviour by BELIEVING that many other cyclists dope.

There is a possible view of the world that exists, in which the vast majority of cyclists are not experts in doping, and in which they would believe that what Floyd said is true, that doping is likely going to lead to getting caught. The only "evidence" anyone carries that this is not true is preconceived notions, based on rumors and speculation.

tom

This is patently not true. We've had entire doped teams that never tested positive. Festina ring a bell? David Millar is a stellar example. Rumsas? Come on, what movie are you watching?

[ZigZag]

bigoted? ironic

I made relevant points.

Floyd has good earning power in the future, no matter what occurs with this hearing. Thus, his requirements to appeal to the public for funds, is weak. It could be seen as more an obfuscation on the "unfairness" of the process.

Is it bigoted of me to suggest Floyd will be comfortable in his life in terms of a healthy income if he manages his affairs well? Is it bigoted of me therefore to suggest that relying on public funds lends a criticism his defense and personal actions lack principle and credibility? Is it bigoted of me to suggest that when someone talks of "their" wealth being drawn down could be perceived as gauche when on a simple relative scale Floyd has "more" than "less" in America. He has good earning power, I guarantee you Floyd should be able to earn multiple six figures with a decent management team. I never said Floyd has more than folks in Africa, but if you want to get into absurd arguments, and all of you folks contend I am bigoted, heck, lets ramp up our arguments to shrill proportions fools.

If Floyd does not solicit funds, much of what I wrote is moot, and I have already been into this comprehensively, and I don't want to harp.
See before, Floyd has never denied the possibility and indeed he has raised that public aid solicitation with ambiguity over implementation.

ZZ, you need to read over some more discussions and be less inclined to hand out epithets such as bigoted with such alacrity.

What is bigoted is when you insult American society as a whole, which you did. When people refer to the LNDD as the "French" lab in a derogatory manner, tht's bigoted as well (just an example). A prejudiced attitude can only be met with alacrity, otherwise it may infect those who don't recognize such ugliness. Believe and say what you want, dude, but when you cast aspersions on a group as you have, you're gonna be called on it. With alacrity, though not cheerfully.

[chris t]

What is bigoted is when you insult American society as a whole, which you did. When people refer to the LNDD as the "French" lab in a derogatory manner, tht's bigoted as well (just an example). A prejudiced attitude can only be met with alacrity, otherwise it may infect those who don't recognize such ugliness. Believe and say what you want, dude, but when you cast aspersions on a group as you have, you're gonna be called on it. With alacrity, though not cheerfully.

don't call me dude, mate.

You can't suppress my voice as much as you want. How is a differing opinion that foreigners have? Foreigners may not be allowed to hold such an opinion because in runs contra to popular American belief? Please.

Bigoted is an opinion that runs opposite to your thinking. hahahahahaah, I get it.

[strbuk]

don't call me dude, mate.

You can't suppress my voice as much as you want. How is a differing opinion that foreigners have? Foreigners may not be allowed to hold such an opinion because in runs contra to popular American belief? Please.

Bigoted is an opinion that runs opposite to your thinking. hahahahahaah, I get it.

No being bigotted is when you negatively judge someone based on their ethnicity, their religion, their gender, or their skin color( among other things too stupifying to mention). It's not just a mere disagreement over an opinion, it goes deeper than that, as I am sure you are well aware.

Paula

[dbrower]

Floyd has good earning power in the future, no matter what occurs with this hearing.
[...]
Is it bigoted of me to suggest Floyd will be comfortable in his life in terms of a healthy income if he manages his affairs well?
[...]
He has good earning power, I guarantee you Floyd should be able to earn multiple six figures with a decent management team.

I find myself mystified by the confident guarantee of future earning potential of someone who has just been tossed ot of his job in disgrace, having not banked massive reserves before hand. What exactly, pray tell, is he going to be doing to earn six figures? What "management team" can there be for someone who isn't already making many multiple hundreds of thousands of US $?

What is he going to do, really, in that situation? How much is he worth to Chris Fortune to hustle powertaps in that case? How much is he worth to Oakley? We know what he's worth to iShares. Is he going to be a motivational speaker?

It's not that easy to be making "multiple six figures" for someone whose main assets, name recognition and credibility, get destroyed in a scandal. It's not like he has his doctoral education to fall back on.

Is the author of this "guarantee" contracting to be the management that will personally ensure that level of income should he lose the case? Willing set up an annuity to back it up? Somehow, that seems unlikely.

-dB

[ZigZag]

don't call me dude, mate.

You can't suppress my voice as much as you want. How is a differing opinion that foreigners have? Foreigners may not be allowed to hold such an opinion because in runs contra to popular American belief? Please.

Bigoted is an opinion that runs opposite to your thinking. hahahahahaah, I get it.

Don't call me mate, dude. I choose not to interpret what you meant earlier by calling my response "ironic". And I used the Webster's definition of bigoted when I've responded to your statement. Anyone can believe anything they want. No problem. I can't suppress anything. I shouldn't be able to. Free speech, dude or mate, is what it's all about. And when someone makes a blanket statement about a group as you did, a statement which is prejudiced to the core, a member of that group has the right to reply. One only hopes he or she has the class not to go down to the offender's level.

You don't know Floyd. You don't know enough to rag Americans. And you don't seem to have any empathy for a person dealing with the stresses he must be encountering. I hope he does race again because he's a kick-ass cyclist. If being against prejudice is the American way, then stars and stripes, baby. Or mate. Or dude. Get it?

[chris t]

No being bigotted is when you negatively judge someone based on their ethnicity, their religion, their gender, or their skin color( among other things too stupifying to mention). It's not just a mere disagreement over an opinion, it goes deeper than that, as I am sure you are well aware.

Paula

have you read the thread? Do you understand context?

The line was an effective quote/summary of ZZ's flawed contention. Please, try and understand the train of argument.

[strbuk]

have you read the thread? Do you understand context?

The line was an effective quote/summary of ZZ's flawed contention. Please, try and understand the train of argument.

Chris it's not too difficult to understand your train of argument. I was commenting on your oblivion as regards the use of the word "bigotted". Try to bait someone else please.

paula

[chris t]

Don't call me mate, dude. I choose not to interpret what you meant earlier by calling my response "ironic". And I used the Webster's definition of bigoted when I've responded to your statement. Anyone can believe anything they want. No problem. I can't suppress anything. I shouldn't be able to. Free speech, dude or mate, is what it's all about. And when someone makes a blanket statement about a group as you did, a statement which is prejudiced to the core, a member of that group has the right to reply. One only hopes he or she has the class not to go down to the offender's level.

You don't know Floyd. You don't know enough to rag Americans. And you don't seem to have any empathy for a person dealing with the stresses he must be encountering. I hope he does race again because he's a kick-ass cyclist. If being against prejudice is the American way, then stars and stripes, baby. Or mate. Or dude. Get it?

prejudice? Foreigners are entitled to an opinion. Merely saying the phrase or term "net worth" is a parculiarly American term and a way of thinking foreigners may consider gauche. Just how is that bigoted.

When you have "more" as compared to "less" and start to be concerned with the expense of your defense of personal reputation, there is an anomaly that is staring out at you. When the future earning capacity of said example is not in doubt, then it is more exaggerated.

My point was Floyd intends to race, as well he should, if he gets off. Now the original was either poorly translated, perhaps because it was translated to Flemish and back to English, or Floyd was quoted in a less than true moment. He may have had a moment of weakness. Or you are to believe he will spend a few hundred thousand on winning his case and then retire. And complain about the expense. That is your viewpoint. I think the underlying reality is pretty obvious.

perhaps a definition of bigoted could include conceding Santi Perez' and Roberto Heras' guilt with not so much as a whimper, yet decrying Tyler Hamilton and Floyd Landis as victims of conspiracy.

Chris it's not too difficult to understand your train of argument. I was commenting on your oblivion as regards the use of the word "bigotted". Try to bait someone else please.

paula

bait?

perhaps you might like to reply to the person alleging bigotry, not the person alleged.

Hint quote ZZ, not me, and criticise their definition.

[amifan]

even coppi and merckx had positives. get back on the bike and come out attacking.

Yeah exactly... Get back on topic you guys .... net worth whatever... Chris's statement wasn't bigotry in any way. It was an observation. You all needn't get so uptight about it. Maybe it is true that non-Americans shy away from talking about money publically... However, such sentiments are ususally expressed by people who have - the have nots talk about money all the time - ususally about not having enough Anyway. What the hell was this thread about to begin with? Oh yeah, about Floyd losing heart?

[ZigZag]

Yeah exactly... Get back on topic you guys .... net worth whatever... Chris's statement wasn't bigotry in any way. It was an observation. You all needn't get so uptight about it. Maybe it is true that non-Americans shy away from talking about money publically... However, such sentiments are ususally expressed by people who have - the have nots talk about money all the time - ususally about not having enough Anyway. What the hell was this thread about to begin with? Oh yeah, about Floyd losing heart?

Sorry, Amifan, I got caught up in defending my countrymen. Making an untrue disparaging remark about a society or social subset is prejudiced and if one sticks by it, they are a bigot. It's offensive and doesn't qualify as a mere observation. But thanks for the reset. I'll move on.

I have to say that it is sad to see Floyd getting down because of the intrinsic unfairness of the arbitration process. And like I've said before, I hope people can take his statements in context- he's in a hard place in his life, whether one believes he's innocent or guilty. I hope he get's the fair shot he deserves but apparently doesn't think is gonnna happen. I don't think he'd quit if things worked out. But I understand how he could make such statements considering where he is. And don't forget about the suicide if his father in law. I can't imagine dealing with that in the best of times. I also can't imagine someone telling me, "You can't work in your field of expertise anymore to support your family." People do have bills to pay.

Again, thanks for the reset.

[chris t]

Sorry, Amifan, I got caught up in defending my countrymen. Making an untrue disparaging remark about a society or social subset is prejudiced and if one sticks by it, they are a bigot. It's offensive and doesn't qualify as a mere observation. But thanks for the reset. I'll move on.

I have to say that it is sad to see Floyd getting down because of the intrinsic unfairness of the arbitration process. And like I've said before, I hope people can take his statements in context- he's in a hard place in his life, whether one believes he's innocent or guilty. I hope he get's the fair shot he deserves but apparently doesn't think is gonnna happen. I don't think he'd quit if things worked out. But I understand how he could make such statements considering where he is. And don't forget about the suicide if his father in law. I can't imagine dealing with that in the best of times. I also can't imagine someone telling me, "You can't work in your field of expertise anymore to support your family." People do have bills to pay.

Again, thanks for the reset.

"I've never taken testosterone, I would have been stupid to because you just can't get away with it [in doping tests]. What it comes down to is that I'm being accused of stupidity more than doping. Even if I'm proved innocent, my reputation is ruined."

lines like this perpetuate disinformation. competitors take testosterone for an edge, they take testosterone because they can mask it, and get away with it. All the big busts of drug caches in cycling have included testosterone, and there is enough anecdotal evidence existing that epitestosterone supplementation has been an effective mask.

The is a false argument. Just like the Thom Fine's estimation of flase positives and false negatives assuming it is a 505 chance of being a flase positive. I have never heard of an argument that is so flawed, when ou cannot even estimate an input to assume it is a 05% chance of false positive thereofre he is innocent.

[VdB]

Ok, so I got the time to read the article a little bit better, and Floyd doesn't say that he won't be back. What he does say, however, is that he fears he might not get the chance to become a rider again. And that next season will very likely be a lost cause too, because even though he technically speaking isn't suspended yet, no team will want to sign him right now. Here's my translation of the text

I'm taking up this challenge [fighting the institutions] with the same willpower that made me the best rider in the world. I don't know if I'll ever be a professional rider again. Chances are slim that you'll see me on a bike in 2007, but all that doesn't matter at the moment. What they did to me is just unacceptable. I know they'll keep fighting me until I'm all out of money. Who cares? Money comes and goes. I'm not above getting an everyday job. But if I win this, every rider after me will benefit from it too. That's what keeps me going.

And the last few sentences of the interview:

Cycling is just a way of clearing my head at the moment. I ride with the same enthusiasm as a 15-year old, but not really with the idea of becoming a rider again in the near future. Becoming the best rider in the world again is for later. That is, if I get the chance.

The first quote might actually make sense in light of the money-discussion in this thread too. And just for fun, Floyd on de Peet (they were on Mercury together)

A hell of a rider, even though he was only interested in Het Volk, the Ronde van Vlaanderen and Paris-Roubaix. And he could drink like you wouldn't believe! (grins) A great guy who taught me a lot about Belgian beers. Leffe is my favorite, hands down.

Hey Floyd, care to back up those statements about Van Petegem? It sure sounds like him, but I never did share a beer (or two, or five) with him. Actually pretty funny remark keeping the recent Van Huffel - Peiper spat about beer in mind.

[Jimmy]

And the last few sentences of the interview:


QUOTE(Landis)
Cycling is just a way of clearing my head at the moment. I ride with the same enthusiasm as a 15-year old, but not really with the idea of becoming a rider again in the near future. Becoming the best rider in the world again is for later. That is, if I get the chance.

I must have missed it the first time it happened . . . winning the TdF doesn't make you the world's best cyclist - even morally. Sorry for the off topic there.

[cycling newbee]

QUOTE (Landis)

I know they'll keep fighting me until I'm all out of money. Who cares? Money comes and goes. I'm not above getting an everyday job.

There's the money hungry, greedy Floyd that those of us on the left side of the pond all know and love . . . this quote totally explains the desire to start a defense fund too. Us vulgar and tasteless Americans.

[Thomas A. Fine]

This is patently not true. We've had entire doped teams that never tested positive. Festina ring a bell? David Millar is a stellar example. Rumsas? Come on, what movie are you watching?

I was arguing against the "frequently doping" statement, not the getting away with it. I agree that those who do dope are getting away with it to a large degree. But I see no evidence that they're a majority of cyclists, or even a large minority. That's the part that we simply don't know, and I'm getting frustrated by the attitude that we can just take that as an underlying assumption.

tom

The is a false argument. Just like the Thom Fine's estimation of flase positives and false negatives assuming it is a 505 chance of being a flase positive. I have never heard of an argument that is so flawed, when ou cannot even estimate an input to assume it is a 05% chance of false positive thereofre he is innocent.

I never said any such thing at all (to the extent that I can understand your typos (yeah, pot, kettle, black)). If you believe that, it is a crying shame, because the statistical evaluations I've been working on are absolutely the only objective attempt I've seen on DPF to quantify exactly how much people might be doping and how effective WADA has been.

If you ignore or disregard the work that I've been doing (and duckstrap, and others) your argument is that you don't care what 2+2 is because, man, you just know they dope.

tom