http://velonews.com/article/100297/sports-...to-join-the-new

Innovate sports science? That's an interesting way to phrase the reasoning behind why I put this thread in this forum.

I'd love to see the particulars of his contract!

Sounds like there was a problem fitting him in with a lower workload but with full salary.

Still, kudos for the article raising this:


I'm sure Lim's eyes are a bit more wide open now, but will he have to squint them at the Shack? Time to re-read his Ed Coyle?

Well stated.

Agree with the kudos offered by Kiwi:

Though not a master
of Floyd's disaster
Lim can twirl his eyes
In mock surprise .
To promote laughter
For what RS is after

It the real message that Radio Shack is simply thumbing its nose at doping control?

Dave.

doping controls are an opportunity to take an advantage over the other guys

This is wonderful:

Ok, as the compulsive optimist, I guess it's my job to add:

Maybe Armstrong and Bruyneel want Lim to show them some ways to win that aren't doping. Maybe the passport is getting too close, and the many micro-infusions, 'drainage' ('forget the proper term), etc., are making the riders feel like pin cushions. Maybe those methods have less and less benefit under passport surveillance, approaching the benefits of other scientific, legal, performance enhancements.

Thanks Lister!

You may also be getting an employment offer soon!

Tigers and stripes.

Dave.

...just to add some wild speculation:

I think Lim didn't know what Landis was doing, or at least he wasn't made privy to the program. As a sports scientist, he just crunched the numbers. He saw the gains but thought they were from training - and Landis's numbers weren't off the hook relative to others.

He seemed to be doing some pretty good work at Garmin, strictly by the book.

Perhaps - with a nod to Lister - that's what Shack wants. Plus, he's already demonstrated an ability (okay, not so optimistic) to work in a 'compartment'; if he's working more at home crunching numbers he won't get in the way of motorbikes with panniers or the garbage bags with the medical waste.

Hey, if it was as chief ethics officer, with power to make Lance and Johan admit their transgressions, and apologize to my kids for messing up their view of cycling, I'm there!

But I don't think the stripes will change that much...

I'd also need carte blanche to put Lance's cancer income towards cancer. That's going to be even harder.

But seriously, like Catlin, it is a possibility that something is making them want to appear to be clean. Didn't work with Catlin, but if Lim has to quit after a few months, it will be even clearer, will it not?

Good stuff about Lim here, and in the linked interviews, including an admirable position on doping, but also hard questions from NYVelocity. (Damn, I wish other journalists asked questions like that.)

http://nyvelocity.com/content/features/200...lim-radio-shack

But they already have Ferrari, that famous "doctor" who shuns doping in favor of super training plans and orange juice.

(I respect your posts, so don't take this negatively)

If Lim had *ANY* experience as a sports scientist, he would have been *F'g AMAZED* at Landis' gains.

It is hard to believe that he could not have found Landis' numbers out of this world, unless all of his other experiences had been with similar 'programmed' athletes.

Dave.

+1
IMO, there is absolutely no way to be intricately involved with the training (or any intimate matter) of pro cyclists and not be in the know.

Sadly, there seems to be no way for a sports scientist to be involved in Cycling and keep their reputation. Many have tried ... success rate: 0.

Let me throw some more speculation at this one...

I'm just reading the interview with Lim and found it interesting that he was just out of grad school and was really not employed fulltime by Landis. Then he commented: "I knew it was consistent with what I'd seen him do in training, the power values I had for him both for training and racing."

Which makes me wonder if Lim really had much experience at all with 'real world' coaching to be able to see that something was wrong, and whether Landis was on some sort of program that rolled over from Postal. Perhaps Lim really was just naive and had very little with which to make comparisons. If I recall correctly, Landis' absolute numbers weren't off the scale - impressive, but not Armstrong-esque.

For some reason, I'm inclined to give Lim the benefit of the doubt. How the conversation with Armstrong about 6.7 w/kg will go would be just fascinating to hear, though!

That Lim would peddle that garbage even today, is nothing but self-serving spin. Nobody starts doping when they show up at the Tour. And he damned well knows that. So to set up the bogus argument that he had no reason to suspect anything was amiss, had no signs, no clues, because Floyd's performance was roughly constant while he was with him, is flat out disingenuous. It's intellectually dishonest. Seriously, it'd be like a doped-up body-builder's coach saying "well, gee, I had no inkling the guy was doping -- I mean he lifted just as much in the gym in the days before the competition as he had when I started working with him 9 months earlier, he weighed the same thing, give or take, had just as many bulging muscles". That line of reasoning, of course, is a J-O-K-E. It's just a self-serving way of trying to establish innocence.

Yes, Lim was young and inexperienced. But that doesn't wash as cover either. You don't get a graduate degree in sports physiology and and live in that kind of world -- even if it is only the academic side -- without knowing what the lay of the land is generally. No you might not know the full extent or all the specifics, but to not know the various ways in which basic performance enhancement is achieved, not know the full set of alternatives in which injuries can be rapidly healed, recovery aided, etc., and to fail to know those same methods can be used to increase performance ... it's not possible. Either that or you'd have to be the most deliberately clueless guy on the planet.

Lim is trying to have it both ways here, or trying to con people into believing there really is a way he can be inside and do what he does, while having no association with what goes on inside.

And yes, the final insult is him claiming Floyd's numbers weren't other-worldly. He can't have it both ways. Either he plays the naive and inexperienced card -- in which case, he hasn't worked with world-class athletes before, in which case, Floyd's numbers would have been so far off the charts compared to anything else he'd ever seen before, he'd be blown away. Hell, Floyd's number were off the charts relative to the other guys he rode off the mountain the day of "The Ride" ... including just riding his breakaway partner off his wheel like some sort of Cat 5 local racer.

If Lim wanted any credibility, he could be HONEST instead of this disingenuous B.S. He could step up and say, "there was really no way for me to know with any certainty one way or the other. Some guys get that rare gift to perform at the top of the world while clean, where even other super-talented pros would require dope to get to. You can give me the data from those two guys, and it will be identical. And I literally can't tell you which is which. My job wasn't to start out doubting Floyd, it was to take the measurements, do the science, relay the results. The results were relatively consistent. I'm not an idiot, and I'm not clueless, and I don't wish to be disingenuous here. So I'll say this: I knew all along, that it was theoretically possible that he doped. I also knew from the relative consistency of his performance metrics, that if he doped, he doped "professionally" -- meaning he doped systematically, according to a long-term program, in secret, in a way that kept anyone who didn't need to know, in the dark and clean, with full plausible deniability. I can assure you, I never saw a needle, and Floyd never said a word. That being the case, I don't feel like it's on me to go around doubting and trying to dig for things out of my view. But I can also tell you I was aware that in my position, I would never know one way or the other. That is the nature of the business. So either I was going to turn down the job with Floyd and turn down every other job I'm ever offered in elite sports where success is a function of maximizing human physiological performance, or I'm going to accept that I can only control my job, and then rely on the testing, and the institutional governing bodies to police the sport. And to go about doing my job in a way where I step up to the plate any time my scientific results indicate doping. That's it. That's all I can do. That's all anyone in my position can do."

Good PR options florida, but the more likely truth is that he simply knew what was going on.

In that case, looking for gray areas becomes pretty hard.

Floyd doped right after OP and BALCO hit the fan. OP broke that May and was headline news during that Tour. Presuming that he isn't an idiot, then either:

1. He simply turned his head the other way.
2. He knew that his work would assist the fine-tuning of the program.

Dave.

I see the whitewash bucket is back out, looking for targets of opportunity.

Good job, guys.

@kiwi: I really don't think FL took anything with him from Postal to Phonak in terms of doping. He was visibly worse in 2005 than 2004 in the Tour (there is of course the thing with being a leader for the first time and all that) but in 2006 he was simply a new rider, with an extra-relaxed riding style, noted by many commentators.

@florida: good post

This could very well be right, and I certainly don't know enough about Lim's story to judge. However, let me say this: Having looked at a lot of the scholarly literature on performance and on doping, there's such a shortage of decent data on elite athletes and on doped athletes that it's probably pretty tough for someone fresh out of school to really know what are the normal (non-doped) limits for elite athletes. This is part of the reason why implementing a decent biopassport is so tough. If Lim never saw Landis taking anything, then I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt on that, because I don't think looking at performance data alone is enough.

(Note: I'm a statistician who sometimes works on medical research, but I have absolutely no training or expertise as a physiologist. I've read a lot of papers purely as a cycling fan, and I have enough background to understand most of them, but I really only know enough to be dangerous. So if someone has a different reading of the available literature, I'd love to hear it.)

Well there are some other aspects to the equation too. What exactly is it that Lim did for Landis and these other guys? With Landis, Lim either a) didn't do that much for him and thus he "didn't know" or he knew everything and didn't ever say or c) he's really naive. My guess is for Landis he never really did that much.

The other things that I keep coming back to, while I want the Garmin guys to be clean Wiggo and CV have made some pretty remarkable changes. If I thought the axe was going to swing again, is there a better team to be on than Lance'

This thread is pitiful.
The only way some of you could come to the conclusions you did about Lim after reading both links is by having made up your mind before reading both and then "reading in" what you wanted to based on your cynicism and pre-made opinions.
Not many of you gave a moment of thought in regard to his good name or reputation based on your "reading" of the articles only casting innuendo and your own soap opera evaluations of his character.
Some of the comments border on slander. It shows a total lack of respect and poor judgement, though I'm willing to guess none of you know Allen Lim and so won't have to face him in a personal meeting.
I'm sure some of you feel you've done something noble which only compounds the act; you haven't.
I read the same articles and I think his reasons for leaving Garmin are the same considerations many of us might have made in moving to another job. Shorter hours, closer to home and opportunity to innovate in his field... all logical - but no, there had to be some deep dark reason he was left. Some of you guys have to stop watching the TV Tabloids like Entertainment Tonight, TMZ its bending your ability to see what is in front of your eyes.
You also miss something here perhaps even more important: If and If is a big word at this point, as far as I'm concerned - If Landis doped is it possible that Lim was in the dark. If its possible that a man as well trained as Lim is then it brings up a big question regarding what value the tests have and the people using the blood passport to target riders doping. (I know, I know... don't get your t^^'s in a ringer Landis was found guilty and lost his appeal - nuf said.)
Its completely possible if Landis doped that Lim had no idea what was going on. Landis was always a talented athlete he didn't rise like Venus out of the ocean in a sea shell.
Lim has never had a whisper of charges he helped anyone dope... unlike some who have been charged and found guilty of it... this is just over the top. He also doesn't have a long list of guys he coached that were busted for doping unlike some managers and coaches... What he does have in his past is a record of antidoping efforts and working for clean cycling.
Personally I find Lim's comments on riding clean and winning well thought out and having a sound basis... but if you've already made up your mind you'll never see or understand it... and it's a mindset like what is expressed in this thread that is probably the biggest barrier to achieving a sport and sports free of drugs.
There is so much objectionable in this thread that its about all I can do not to shut it down.
But I'll back.
At the moment I figure there are a few of you here who owe Allen Lim an apology.
Get a grip guys... think
Cheers,
Vaughn

Sorry, Vaughn, but this post is pitiful.

I have absolutely no problem being criticized for going overboard on a particular post. Feel free.

But, I have a huge problem with this fantasy land on whether Landis doped or not.

The judgement has come in. Multiple times. Exhaustively.

He doped.

And, if stories about pouring blood bags down toilets has any truth whatsoever, he is more likely to have been a habitual doper.

If you cannot get your rose-colored glasses off long enough to observe the truth, then how on earth can you be a competent judge on whether Lim was knowledgeable or not, or complicit or not.

Sorry, but you cannot be.

I actually can commend you for your loyalty, but that same loyalty makes your opinion moot. Worse, because you are blind to Landis it is hard to believe you are clairevoyant on Lim.

Please take your own advise, and get a grip and think.

Dave.

On this subject ... It's all been thrashed to death already. History says Landis doped. The world of science simply shrugs it's shoulders and moves on. If there was a problem with the results, that can be fixed next time round ... or maybe the time after that ... or maybe ...

If there was a problem with the results, it was only because those results demonstrated what two people left in the world did not want to recognize themselves that Landis was found to have doped even after exhausting all appeal routes.

The outcome was never really in doubt, no matter how much you wish it were. There is nothing to fix next time. If there is a next time, it will be a lifetime ban.

You are right, though, thanks to extreme measures by those who were either misled by the defense or who may have been purposely trying mislead the dialog in his defense, this has been all thrashed to death already.

Hence the surprise and disappointment when a thread is called pitiful when only a pitiful rationalization for that dismissal could be put forward.

Dave.

You miss the point completely D-Qeued. The point is it is not a given that Lim knew.
You obviously also miss the post that Lim had quite legitimate reasons (the ones he gave) to make the move over to the Shack. I don't see a quid pro quo re doping as some go so far to assume. You can say what you want about Landis as the "justice" and appeal process found him guilty. But nothing said in the interviews implicates Lim.

Cheers, V

No, I didn't miss what you were trying to say at all.


There is the possible and the probable.

I do read posts from others carefully.

Dave.

And per the rules, and per the mods, this thread should not be in the doping segment of the forum. Lim is not connected to any doping procedure or conviction whatsoever. So, per the rules, kill the thread. It's baseless.

Not connected to any conviction?

Didn't he consult, personally, to Floyd?

Didn't he monitor Floyd's performance? Extensively?

Didn't he question some of Floyd's numbers, indirectly and directly?

Do you really think that dopers would not find performance monitoring to be helpful in assessing and improving their doping regimine?

<ahem> Can you say Conconi test?

Aren't you a cycling coach? Do you help your athletes monitor performance? Can you not see a connection between perfomance enhancement and the desire or need to measure and confirm the enhancement?

He was Floyd's personal performance monitoring guru. Enough said.

Dave.

Maybe some of the reactions to Lim's move to the Shack are tough, but he has gone from working with a convicted doper to working with a team that worked with/still works with one of the most reknowned doping facilitators.

Even if Lim didn't know Landis was doping (hard to believe?) he must know about the Hog's and Lancy-poo's reputations so going there logically leads to questions about Lim's integrity.

As long as Vaughn and Whareagle refuse to consider Landis' suspension as an error, they are far from contributing to a solution to a problem that they appear to want to sweep under the carpet.

Ok so enlighten me Ali, who is the most renkown doping facilitator facilitator on RadioShack?



The discussion about Lim needn't have been in the Doping discussion forums.
What s going on here is worse. Essentially Lim's reputation is being dragged through the mud based on suspicions and speculations. Candidly I think it is inexcusable. And thats what you didn't get D-Qed.

Whats missed is that there is no charges or convictions following Lim around... say what you want about Floyd he took his knocks, lost his case, and lost his appeal. A dear friend, his family etc.

Lim wasn't even charged or under suspicion at the time or for that matter in the past.
Its as possible and probable that if doping was going on with one of his clients he may never have known. Of course this doesn't fit your theory or opinions; but that of course is unlikely to change your viewpoint or agenda which is pretty transparent.
God knows there must be another doper under your bed tonight, OMG! and under my bed too!
Quick! The Sky is Falling! The witches are loose among the innocent... the wolves among the lambs.

I suppose none of you would mind being the brunt of the same type of character assasination that you are willing to put Allen Lim through??

Cheers,

Vaughn

Vaughn,

First, you quoted and responded to frenchfry, not Ali.

You may have a strong case, but it is made stronger when you keep track of things like that.

Second, ff is referring to Ferrari. Please convince me you did not understand that.

Third, we are dealing with a sport where doping is ingrained in the culture.

Now, of course you don't believe that and cannot acknowledge it when you still refuse to acknowledge that Floyd doped.

Lim is an intelligent guy, so we can either argue that he is really naive and cannot understand that there would not even be a shadow of doubt that doping could be a motivating factor or his services. Or, we can assume that he is not so intelligent.

This is the Catch 22 of the situation.

And, the guys who likely spend the most money on their doping programs - i.e. the guys that have exclusive contracts with guys like Ferrari - are also the guys who will likely spend the most money on people like Lim. Because Lim's insights can aid and abet what is now criminal activity in France, and because the guys hiring him don't appear to have ethical lines, then we are stuck in an unavoidable speculation.

You may not like it, but you are going to have to clean up the sport to avoid it.

That would be a nice Christmas present.

Dave.

It's been awhile since I posted (busy, busy, busy), but the opinion son this thread sort of maybe ignore, speculative as they are, a third hypothetical. Maybe, yeah, I'll give Lim the credit that he really didn't know what was going on with Floyd; he's a power guy, not a blood guy. He's, I imagine, figured it out by now: just look at his answers to Kimmage's questions in the cited interviews. He's also not an idiot, and has been in the Euro-cycling scene, working with Vaughters (LA's former teammate and former gonzo himself, I think). He's figured out where LA is coming from, I think. But he's not being asked to aid and abet any (alleged) 'shack doping (that is, his knowledge will help shack doped shack riders, but it would also help clean riders just about as well)...it's a good job, with a cyclist whose name will get those associated with him recognition beyond the smallish cycling market...the pay is good...sure, LA's got a smudgy rep, and so will he now, but the heck with it, take the job. I'm personally hoping he doesn't start spouting off about how "clean" Lance is, but his career move, bad PR though it might be for those "in the know", does not mean he's making his choice with blind eyes or no morals. I suppose I could state this with greater clarity, but I did spend yesterday cooking, drinking, and eating. The worst part was still waking up in the AM absolutely starved. I thought my metabolism was supposed to slow down in the off-season?

Careful, you'll be ridiculed for this. But I think it might be more than a third hypothetical.

Hmm..but hasn't this mindset been thoroughly debunked by the perseverance of the doping culture? Lim's mantras are exactly the same as other enablers in professional cycling (ie winning is all about attitude, doping is a placebo, a gluten-free diet overcomes the PEDs that race winners have consistently used over the years, etc.). They sound nice if you want to believe in them, but they have no basis in reality. So consequently they are justly ridiculed.



Like what? (Hint: working for Garmin doesn't count)

Maybe there is no evidence linking Lim to doping, but if he regurgitates disingenuous omerta propaganda in interviews, it is fair to make fun of him, and it's fair to question any claim that he contributes to anti-doping. On the contrary, all indications suggest he will fit in nicely at Radio Shack, and will make a substantial contribution to their PR campaign.

This sort of line fits in especially well with Armstrong's agenda...


Sounds great, obviously, but is easily refuted when you consider the history and recent history of cycling, as well as the testimony of whistle blowers. At that point, it's worthwhile to consider what might motivate Lim to say stuff like this.

Nope I didn't get that as a reference to Ferrari.
Yep Lim is a bright guy... but even bright guys can be fooled. We're all made fools at some point in our life.
Yep, Speculation...
Sure its endemic and cultural... Cannibals see nothing wrong with make a meal out of our cold corpses.
It all comes down to moral/ethical standards or a lack of both. Cultures and civilizations make their own moral codes based on their survival as a group; too many easy examples in history.
I've said it time and again that at its core that doping in all sports is a symptom of a lack of moral and ethical standards and acceptance.
The mantras: "they all dope", "you have to dope to win", "you will need to dope at sometime if you turn pro." are all self fulfilling prophesies that show the depth of the doping culture in cycling and other sports.
The antithesis is: You can win without doping. I won't dope because it is wrong and endangers my health. I want to know when I win that it was because I won not me on dope won.
Others might be: Doping is cheating, I refuse to cheat my friends and fellow riders out of a honestly earned win. After all is said and done my integrity is more important than winning a bike race.
Now we can bring kids up the line with either of the mantras above can be used to protect the status quo or start to change the culture in sports. Make a choice.
Ideas first, action after... or perhaps ideas, acceptance and then action based on the ideas.
I think we turned the corner but it won't be an easy battle.
The anti-doping fight is nothing less than a crusade.
It will take men of integrity being honest and confronting the past but also making every effort to create and demand new moral and ethical standard. It's a war of ideas and changing the hearts and minds of athletes.
I think it also demands a certain integrity and mental differentiation from us as fans to not paint every rider, every coach, every manager etc with the same brush and speculation we might those caught doping or confessing to it.
If there was integrity and honesty in sport there would be no doping at all... and no need of testing but then would be the best of worlds.
As a result the world and our lives are complicated by the dishonest among us, it robs us of peace in our cities, drains our investment accounts and savings, makes us wait in lines at the airports, puts bars on our windows, taxes us beyond our limits, destroys marriages, fills us with false ideas, attempts to obfuscate the truth, starts countless wars and leads some of us to live lives filled with dread and fear.
In best of all worlds we would find a way for those who erred to find their integrity and moral/ethical sense again and rise to honesty, but first we need to strive to live a life of integrity first and then demand it from others as well.
I think this forum has always been about two to three years ahead of the curve on anti-doping and what we might do to bring about a change of culture in cycling and anti-doping efforts.
And so I wax philosophic on New Years Eve and hope that 2010 brings us closer to bringing about a change in the culture of cycling to one closer to the ideal. Maybe by Christmas next year the teams and riders will give us the change we desire and can celebrate.
Best,
Vaughn

I've been asking him those questions on twitter for a couple of days and he blocked me.

(As Ali first highlighted) Floyd does appear to differ with these views:

In e-mails to cycling officials, Landis said he hired physiologist Dr. Allen Lim in 2005 and that Lim helped prepare Landis and Leipheimer for blood transfusions

On the other hand, Lim responded

Lim called the allegations “crazy,” and said he would never work with a rider who used performance-enhancing drugs.

Now that Floyd has come forward and stated what everyone already knew, perhaps Lim thinks Floyd really was riding a Harley, and that the doping positive and the detailed admission are both fiction.

Personally, I am leaning even more strongly towards believing that Lim knew and is now implicated.

Omerta is starting to look pretty silly.

Dave.

USPS/Discovery/Radioshack worked/works with Ferrari. This was a poorly hidden secret, and has been confirmed by Floyd.

Lim Moved to Radioshack.

Maybe he wanted to learn from the master. After all, Ferrari takes 10% of the salaries of those he "prepares". Not a bad business to inherit.

I can just feel the disappointment and pain that threads like this can evoke, but we have to go through this before cycling can get better.


If I may have one remark, admittedly in questionable taste... this is a Lance that needs to be boiled. :-)

I think Vaughn was already on to this boiled on the butt of sport stuff a couple of years ago

And, he was right, I was right.

Floyd is now a confirmed AND admitted doper.

And as for Lim?


This is still true. Maybe not any whisper at all. More like someone is shouting it from the rooftops and through every media outlet they can find.

If it is a sound basis we are talking about, then clearly doping has again been demonstrated to provide the best results.

I am not sure Lim is owed anything along these lines based on what Floyd has stated, but I'll humbly take the apology now. Perhaps Lim owes us all a lot more than that.

Dave.