http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/sports/AP-CYC-Landis-Decision.html?ex=1347940800&en=17d21486f3420dbc&ei=5089&partner=rssyahoo&emc=rss

$2 million defense down the drain

I guess this means that douchebag LeMond can stand up and tell the world he told us so and is still the only American to ever win clean. This ruling is BS. At least a lot of the flaws in the system have been brought to the surface for all to see. Still a joke.

Campbell's dissent:

''If such practises continue, it may well be that in the future, an error like this could result in the dismissal'' of a positive finding by the lab.


In Campbell's opinion, Landis' case should have been one of those cases.


''In many instances, Mr. Landis sustained his burden of proof beyond a reasonable doubt,'' Campbell wrote. ''The documents supplied by LNDD are so filled with errors that they do not support an Adverse Analytical Finding. Mr. Landis should be found innocent.''



In his dissent, Campbell latched onto the T-E ratio test, among other things, as proof that the French lab couldn't be trusted.
''Also, the T-E ratio test is acknowledged as a simple test to run. The IRMS test is universally acknowledged as a very complicated test to run, requiring much skill. If the LNDD couldn't get the T-E ratio test right, how can a person have any confidence that LNDD got the much more complicated IRMS test correct?''



At least someone on the panel had the right opinion.




But... "ultimately, USADA still improved to 35-0 in cases it has brought before arbitration panels since it was founded in 2000."



Must be fair, right? What a freakin' joke...

But Campbell was chosen by Landis, of course he agrees with the Floyd camp, otherwise Landis would have picked someone else... Campbell also ruled in favor of a certain Tyler Hamilton before...

First, let me say that when all this started it seemed wierd that Landis would take testosterone. However, with all the other catches for same, I strongly suspect he did it. That said, I think the lab/WADA/USADA are like most bureacracies and will never admit they made a mistake. I think neither side wins in this, I am glad I am not a pro as I dont think you really can trust the system. Plus, as a lawyer I am disturbed when the panel calls out unspecified discovery failures by USADA. Overall a bad scene for all.

Ugh. Pathetic.

What I found disturbing is that in the majority opinion they stated that if testing errors such as those found in Landis' case continue, they may be grounds for dismissal in future cases. That sort of wording is such a crock...either it is terms for dismissal or it is not. If their testing errors can be found to represent terms for future dismissals, then the same should hold true now or vis versa (i.e. conviction now then conviction later). Not saying they should let Floyd off, but if the evidence and collection methods are good enough to convict him then the should hold true in future cases as well. The same standards should be used regardless of the time frame. If not, then it is really hard to take this whole thing seriously.

That said, I think the lab/WADA/USADA are like most bureacracies and will never admit they made a mistake.

Except when people started pointing out that USADA never loses at arbitration, didn't they point out that they dismiss something like 20% of positive drug tests because there is some kind of problem?

What I found disturbing is that in the majority opinion they stated that if testing errors such as those found in Landis' case continue...

Sounds like they're basically saying you guys need to clean up your act but were not going to let a guy off the hook who we think doped just to teach you a lesson.

BTW, I think the LNDD probably got the message when Landaluze got off based on a gross violation of protocol.

BTW, I think the LNDD probably got the message when Landaluze got off based on a gross violation of protocol.

The only way we'll ever find out is when they screw up someone's test who has the money to fund a defense. The burden of proof is so heavily biased, I don't see that happening very often. I also don't see any reason why LNDD would change anything they do. What's the incentive? Even when they screw up, nothing happens. There are no penalties.

If $2mil isn't enough to fund a defense what is? The real test of the system will be when they screw up someone's test who didn't dope. It did work for Beke's EPO positive since he was able to prove it was the result of a natural process. None of the other people have dared use that tactic, presumably because they all knew their results were from doping rather than some aberrant physiology.

It would also help if these guys gave some thought to what to do if they are caught before actually getting caught. Innocent people don't need to disappear for a week conferring with legal counsel and then come out with several different versions of the "truth".

Innocent people don't need to disappear for a week conferring with legal counsel and then come out with several different versions of the "truth".

Really?

Because you have made extensive studies on how innocent people react when they are confronted with serious allegations. No need to worry as innocent people are never convicted, right?

I still can't believe it. Have you guys read up on how screwed up the carbon-isotope test was??? The machine (running on 10 year old software that wasn't operating correctly, and the machine was operating out of the reccomended calibration) had large iron handles screwed on for transport. They were supposed to be removed. Have you ever held a compass next to iron??? Also, the people running the machine didn't have the manual or anything, they just sort of figured out how to use it with help of whoever used it last.

There really isn't any proof either way, but for everything else it seems that the athletes are INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY, doesn't it???

I'm really glad I'm not Floyd Landis, spending 10+ years training to win the tdf, then getting it stripped away by incompetent lab techs, spending two million in defense, and then losing because Lemond had to come in with his BS and the beaurocracies want to cover their butts and make an example.

I am convinced that Floyd did not take testosterone to enhance his cycling. It just isn't logical.

Now I am not saying that he didn't have testosterone in his system. It seems pretty obvious that he must of got some steroids in his blood doping transfusion.

I am really hoping for Landis to spill the beans on the whole system. I can't blaim him, I really can't. He is just a product of the system. Maybe with a tell all book he could get some money to keep his family under roof.

I was rooting for him throughout the trail not because I thought he rode a clean tour, but because I felt bad for him.

Really?

Because you have made extensive studies on how innocent people react when they are confronted with serious allegations. No need to worry as innocent people are never convicted, right?I haven't, but psychologists have been doing studies on exactly those sorts of issues for decades and liars follow fairly stereotypical patterns in their word choices, facial expressions, eye movements, attitudes and behaviors. For the most part people telling the truth exhibit different patterns in all of those areas.

The exceptions being trained or pathological liars who "believe" every word that comes out of their mouths, so guys like Oliver North are readable only in the sense that nothing they say should be given any weight since truth has no meaning or value to them.

There are a number of excellent books on the psychology of deception, interrogation techniques, micro expressions, etc. that are well worth checking out. Very useful in interviewing and many other interpersonal interactions.

Now I am not saying that he didn't have testosterone in his system. It seems pretty obvious that he must of got some steroids in his blood doping transfusion.


The other thing that I've read in multiple locations is that his testosterone level wasn't abnormally high, it's that the test measures a ratio of testosterone to episosterone (probably spelled that wrong) and the episosterone was unrealistically low. It definately gave the impression that the test was either screwed up or the sample was contaminated.

Its also funny how the numbers got publicized. His three sets of data were something like 4.1:1, 4.9:1, and 11.5:1. Of course the 11.5:1 got publicized. Normally a number like that would be considered a mistake and rejected (in this case Dick Pound made some extremely innapropriate comments to reporters saying how much testosterone was found in Floyds urine). The legal limit for this French lab was arbitrarily lowered from 6:1 to 4:1, which really was a waste. A university did a study and found that several medical students there (who were definately not doping) would have gotten a positive test with the 4:1 ratio. If the lab had been swiss or american or australian, Floyds sample would never have been looked at as a positive.

Of course then they did some carbon-isotope testing with the faulty machine and technicians, and now they believe the data from that too. Hopefully Floyd has the money and will to try again and finally get his name clear.

The other thing that I've read in multiple locations is that his testosterone level wasn't abnormally high, it's that the test measures a ratio of testosterone to episosterone (probably spelled that wrong) and the episosterone was unrealistically low. It definately gave the impression that the test was either screwed up or the sample was contaminated.

This is just one example of how the Landis camp played on the ignorance of it's audience. The normal response to endurance training, particularly the type of stress 2 weeks into a Grand Tour is a surpressed level of Testosterone. His level of testosterone should have been quite low.