September 24, 2007
Comments Off

The Mailbag is a regular department on VeloNews.com. If you have a comment, an opinion or observation regarding anything you have read in VeloNews magazine or on VeloNews.com, write to webletters@insideinc.com. Please include your full name, hometown and state or nation. Letters may be edited for length and clarity. Writers are encouraged to limit their submissions to one letter per month. The letters published here contain the opinions of the submitting authors and should not be viewed as reflecting the opinions, policies or positions of VeloNews.com, VeloNews magazine or our parent company, Inside Communications, Inc.

Justice for Landis, but not for us
Editor:
Now that the arbitration panel has affirmed Floyd Landis’s positive doping test result, cycling fans might hope, at last, for a sense of closure. But, sadly, that is still not to be. Landis has already signaled his rejection of the verdict, an appeal to the international Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) is likely, and Landis’s base of loyal supporters, like those who supported Tyler Hamilton and others, will likely continue to protest his innocence in the face of the evidence.

Landis himself has suffered financial ruin and enormous personal losses as a result of this process. So, too, has the sport of cycling. The tarnished maillot jaune of 2006 clearly contributed to the loss of sponsors willing to risk their reputations by associating with cycling, as well as adding to the prevailing sense of malaise that surrounds the peleton. Meanwhile, riders continue to get banned from races on suspicions alone, while others continue to dope, race, and get caught — or don’t get caught — leaving the legitimacy of any race in doubt.

As a cycling fan, I would hope that the sport would use the Landis decision as a prod to finally achieve a degree of honesty with itself–one in which riders could receive clemency or amnesty in exchange for truthful information about doping, and in which sponsors and fans alike could achieve some degree of confidence that we are witnessing a spectacle in which all participants are competing by the same set of rules.

But, as the Landis case illustrates, denial and combativeness are still the order of the day, and the day of truth, reconciliation, and finality is still disappointingly far off.

In the meantime, one is left only to support the Slipstream-Chipotles, T-Mobiles and CSCs of the world, who at least appear determined to do something about it, in the hopes that others will follow. Would that Landis and his supporters could join them.

Steve Kuperberg
Bethesda, Maryland

The only winner is the anti-doping establishment
Editor:
The only people for which the Landis decision is a victory is the anti-doping “establishment.” As a sports-medicine physician, I am held to the highest standards in caring for athletes and looking out for their overall health. What has been made exceptionally clear to me in reading the entire text of the hearing is that the labs in question had anything but the highest standards and they ignored or just plain screwed up the lab analysis such that no clear conclusion could be made.

What seems to be more offensive, however, is the inability of the “system” to recognize the problem and admit that there was a fatal error. The price of a false positive is the end of a career and as such, any hint of lab error should exonorate the athlete. How anyone can trust the impartiality of a system where WADA-accredited lab staff are prohibited from providing evidence or testimony that would discredit another WADA-accredited lab at the risk of losing funding is beyond me.

With the current witch-trial climate surrounding performance-enhancing drugs and sports in general these days, I am not surprised at the result. Athletes are now suspended based on suspicion alone (i.e., Valdverde). What I would hope for, however, is that safeguards are put in place to protect the athletes from another miscarriage of justice. Not everyone can afford $2 million for their legal defense team.

While “clean” athletes everywhere may be cheering this result, they should take a moment and consider what would happen if it was them in the cross-hairs of Dick Pound and WADA.

Andrew Hunt
Lake Bluff, Illinois

Testing is flawed, panelists unqualified
Editor:
I’m a Ph.D. candidate in physical chemistry with a background in nuclear chemistry and isotopic analyses. My informed opinion is that the panel should have declared Floyd Landis innocent in light of both uncertain results and the laboratory’s shortcomings. The lab’s results do not indicate anything akin to certainty. They have two data points that fall nowhere near each other and nothing more. That alone is reasonable doubt.

Measurements are only meaningful if they are reproducible. A single number means nothing. Disparate measurements mean that the technique, the sample, or both are flawed. Then written records of the tests must jibe with each other because results mean nothing without sound documentation. The lab failed on all accounts: disparate data, inattention to technical details, and unacceptable documentation. (I’ve seen people lose their jobs for that kind of record keeping.)

Apart from that, the panelists are unqualified to review the Landis case. Review panel members must always be trained in the topic of interest, e.g., scientists should review questionable lab practices. The panel members are casual observers and, therefore, are unfit to review this case and others like it. As such, the lab was able to manipulate the system to its advantage. For that, they’ll pay no penalty. None.

The system of accountability must extend to all sides: prosecution, defense, and judge. Until then, the anti-doping forces will represent a witch hunt at best.

Let’s all utter a sardonic “Hurray!” for this so-called justice.

James Westphal
Seattle, Washington

Pull your heads out of the sand
Editor:
Now that the Landis case has come to a grinding and anti-climactic end, the cries are being heard from all around the world. People can’t believe that Landis really doped. Surely the UCI has pulled off a huge conspiracy to sully his name. And poor Oscar Pereiro cries that he didn’t get a chance to really celebrate his victory properly in Paris during the Tour.

For the Landis fans: Yes, there were problems with the initial test, but the carbon isotope test was found to be done properly and proved that Landis had synthetic testosterone in his body. Newsflash! That’s cheating.

People can’t believe that the UCI has won all of its cases in regards to testing — it must be cheating. Wait a minute! Isn’t that what we want? A body that catches the cheats and then can prove they caught them fair and square? Why are we trying to crucify them?

Pull your heads out of the sand and hope for more cheaters getting run out of the sport and more clean riders climbing to the top of the podium so one day we can watch a bike race without that sinking feeling in our stomach every time a rider we love pulls away from the group on a climb that used to make him suffer.

Roderick Vesper
Cincinnati, Ohio

Sure, the lab goofed, but Landis cheated
Editor:
I’ve met Floyd Landis. He was amazingly down-to-earth, and a great guy to talk with/listen to. He is also a cheater, and someone I’ve lost respect for. Would I join him on a group ride? Probably. Would I support him by buying a book he wrote? Hell, no.

I feel, as most American cyclists do, cheated. I wasn’t quick to judge the situation, though I hoped for his innocence. The 2-1 decision seals the casket. He cheated, he lied, and he got caught. I certainly hope he doesn’t appeal.

I do feel that the admonition of the LNDD included in the decision was rightful. They’re a sloppy laboratory with terrible ethics practices, which is why Landis was acquitted on the elevated T/E ratio. He did get caught, however, with synthetic testosterone in his system. He cheated, and I can’t help but feel angry at that.

Tyler Gregory
Madison, Wisconsin

Congrats to Oscar
Editor:
Let’s hope this is the final chapter in an unfortunate era of cycling. Congratulations to Oscar Pereiro for winning the 2006 Tour de France.

Ray Truant
Hamilton, Ontario, Canada

Regarding the rant
Bravo — I burst out laughing when I saw the image. Of course, it’s not funny.

Mark Legere
Marblehead, Massachusetts

The intersection of Landis Court and the Boulevard of Broken Dreams
Editor:
Excellent! O’Grady should do an updated version of the “Boulevard of Broken Dreams,” showing a paceline with Tyler Hamilton, Marco Pantani, Ivan Basso and Jan Ulrich with Floyd Landis leading the way into a fog bank.

Terry Wallner
Sammamish, Washington

Clever, but hardly courageous
Editor:
It’s a pretty clever response to the guilty decision. It could be taken either way, for Landis or against him. O’Grady doesn’t have the balls to say it was the right or wrong choice, just submit a cute picture, and let most people think he’s on their side.

Rob Nygren
Courtenay, British Columbia, Canada

Monday’s Mailbag: The Landis decision and that photographic ‘Foaming Rant’

by VeloNews.com

Categories : Mailbag

LATEST NEWS »

Rock And Roll - Marathon Series