[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
trailrash wrote:
It says he had high levels on Test. I call total bullshit. Would one injection of test really make him be able to do what he did on stage 17? I doubt it.
TR
I don’t think Test injections can work as fast as all this. How secure are the blood samples?
HH
I agree.
While I don’t doubt he and many others likely do things that they are not supposed, this looks suspicious.[/quote]
I’m just shaking my head in wonderment at the entire spectacle. I can’t believe Landis would risk all of what he’s accomplished, especially coming out from Lance’s shadow, for this win. The fact that he was competing in the Tour with a deteriorated hip was compelling enough. To win, unbelievable.
To win whilst cheating; believable.
That said, I’m reserving full judgment until the B sample is tested and Floyd speaks for himself (which he apparently isn’t ready to do as they can’t seem to find him anywhere. . .but then, he is a Mennonite and maybe he doesn’t carry a phone). Also, all this talk about the French having a field day with this is a little overstated (I’ll probably be proven wrong by L’Equippe). The French loved Floyd because he was everything Lance wasn’t. He was an “everyman” not a “Superman.” He is quiet and humble, unlike Lance. He was seen as saving this past Tour from mediocrity, so I don’t think they’re too ready to lynch the bugger.
Also, the international cycling body and WADA are responsible for testing and parameters; the French just run the race.
Hoping for a rational explanation that does not include injecting.
[quote]CC wrote:
trailrash wrote:
This is where you are wrong about my stance. I actually wouldn’t care if they were allowed to dope. And I have nothing to calm down about.
Right. That’s why on two separate occasions, in your original TDF 2006 thread, when someone brought up the issue of drug use in cycling you jumped their shit or made some smart-ass comment about it. But you don’t care, lol.
I was just replying to your stupid comment.
“Stupid” comment, lol? What, are we in 5th grade again? It was a general wondering, which I’ll say once again (if you would read properly) had more to do with my fascination with preparation than actual drug use.
Smile, buddy :-). You’ll live longer.
[/quote]
yes, I made these comments because they were SPECULATING that “they all do it” You would have figured that out had you “Read Properly”. Boy, guess you got me there.
It seems to me that maybe I misinterpreted what you said in you initial post, but they way you said it allowed it to be interepreted in tow different ways obviously.
sorry for interepreting your post incorrectly.
S
[quote]Amsterdam Animal wrote:
I am not positive about this (no pun intended) but I think they test at least the top 5 finishers every stage. Landis came in second in the first ITT (excluding the prologue) to Gonchar so he would have gotten tested in stage 7.
[/qoute]
From cycling news.com
[quote] Under the Tour de France doping controls, at the end of each stage, the stage winner and yellow jersey wearer are tested, plus at least two random selections, as well as two reserves. It’s understood the turn-around for the doping tests is usually within a week.
[/qoute]
Also, I can never remember a rider being stripped of their Tour title after the fact. There was some discussian around Pantani when his result came up but since it wasn’t during the event they couldn’t do anything unless he admitted. His positive test (which wasn’t his first) came in the Giro the year after when he was about to win it and he remained an adamant little bitch to the end -which was coke I believe.
Since this test didn’t find an unnatural metabolite, Landis can submit to testing to determine if his ratios are naturally skewed if his results were consistantly borderline. There was a track cyclist (Enlish, I believe) a few years back who did this for an inexplicable high hematocrit-- there would be no advantage to blood doiping at his distance-- and after a period of testing was given an exemption for the rule. The circumstances here are way too suspicious for that.
My guess was he did test suspension or something. I think the amount of time needed to gain physiological effect is far shorter than the time needed to accumulate noticeable amounts of muscle for a bodybuilder. He may have assumed that it would work overnight but be mostly out of his system by the end of the next stage. I’m certainly no AAS expert though.
[quote]Amsterdam Animal wrote:
Fellas, fellas, play nice. We were all getting along so well in the Tour de France thread. In this time of peril, we have to stand together as one 
CC wrote:
trailrash wrote:
This is where you are wrong about my stance. I actually wouldn’t care if they were allowed to dope. And I have nothing to calm down about.
Right. That’s why on two separate occasions, in your original TDF 2006 thread, when someone brought up the issue of drug use in cycling you jumped their shit or made some smart-ass comment about it. But you don’t care, lol.
I was just replying to your stupid comment.
“Stupid” comment, lol? What, are we in 5th grade again? It was a general wondering, which I’ll say once again (if you would read properly) had more to do with my fascination with preparation than actual drug use.
Smile, buddy :-). You’ll live longer.
[/quote]
Sorry AA…
Im better now
[quote]Amsterdam Animal wrote:
Haha, good point …but then again, they would take different gear of course. Armstrong would look for stuff that would help him recover quickly etc, rather than some growth hormone that Barry seems to have been sipping on for breakfast, lunch and dinner so to speak.
[/quote]
Agreed. Thanks for showing me the obvious flaws in my joke. I suck. LOL
I just really hope that he isn’t guilty. Like the above poster said. He was the “working man’s” cyclist so to speak. Quiet, humble and just out there to do his job.
[quote]briangodsen wrote:
Donut62 wrote:
Damn. They are going to have a field day with this. What he did was superhuman, drugs or not, and this is going to overshadow it forever.
I love how ‘high testosterone level’ is synonymous with ‘Drug Use’. There are people walking around with T Levels twice that of a normal person (just ask Bas Rutten). Should we really punish people for that? Is it fair to say, ‘you can’t take a pill to give you the same effect of what some genetically gifted person naturally has’. ‘Natural’ is a bullshit term. A situation like this only overshadows Landis’s incredible accomplishment. The guy won the tour with a broken hip. Roughly 3500 KM of pure agony. ‘High Testosterone Levels’. Give me a break.[/quote]
It’s that he had abnormally high testosterone levels (and this is an endurance athlete… not the guys with the most test’ in the world). You also have to keep in mind that these guys are tested several times (not just once… so if one test is shows much higher levels than others… it’s a bit suspicious).
However, he could have been taking a steroidal anti-inflammatory drug for his hip (very common for arthitis suffers). That might explain the higher testosterone levels.
We’ll have to wait until the investigation is over to see what happens… the B samples might clear him entirely.
Some esters of testosterone injections can present themselves in the blood within hours. So it is quite possible that he did inject something. However, I know that if I spent 130km in the saddle riding solo and practically riding for my life, my testosterone levels would probably surge a little bit. Especially after the stage - I mean fuck, who wouldn’t feel like the Alpha Male after winning that stage the way he did?
If the report had said that he tested positive for EPO, then it’d be pretty easy to write him off even without the B sample. But “unusually high testosterone levels” is extremely vague. The human body can do some extraordinary things when it needs to (lift a car off of somebody crushed under it, etc) maybe Floyd and his body figured out that he needed a boost and the gonads went to work.
So pretty much because their accusation is quite vague, I’m going to reserve judgment until they actually find used syringes with Floyd’s DNA on the pin.
Its almost like saying “normal testosterone levels are anywhere from 300 - 1000 ng/dl, your blood test showed 1001, therefore you must be on steroids.”
[quote]Amsterdam Animal wrote:
Yes sir. Plus this will be a nice way for the French to divert from ther Zidane publicity nightmare.
Mark my words, this shit is going to make the Armstrong witch hunt, launched by L’Equipe, look like a fucking church picnic.
[/quote]
The french have already forgotten about the Zidane head-butt (and polls in France show that most people support him… I’ve have tought the opposite… but oh well).
I don’t think that people will take glee in what’s going-on with Landis. Everyone was pulling for him (the French included) and everyone really like him (whereas Armstrong wasn’t so well liked).
The thing about Armstrong is that rumours about his EPO use have been around for years. Former cycling partners claimed that he used, he had some involvement with an Italian doctor who was accused of supplying EPO and guys like Greg Lemond claim that he used (though that sounds like jealousy).
Obvious you can’t accuse Armstrong until he’s failed a test (which he never did… and he’s been tested plenty)… but it does raise suspicion.
However what L’Equipe and Dick Pound did was wrong. The French lab never released any name so they should have shut-up until there was any kind of proof (and ultimately there wasn’t).
I agree a lot with what you are saying but quiet and humble? Maybe to the press, but among the riders he wasnt viewed as such to say the least.
I have seen several Interviews with Dutch riders who gave their sentiments quite different form that and talked about the overall sentiment in the peloton towards him. Quiet and humble were not key words.
[quote]rbnlaw wrote:
I’m just shaking my head in wonderment at the entire spectacle. I can’t believe Landis would risk all of what he’s accomplished, especially coming out from Lance’s shadow, for this win. The fact that he was competing in the Tour with a deteriorated hip was compelling enough. To win, unbelievable.
To win whilst cheating; believable.
That said, I’m reserving full judgment until the B sample is tested and Floyd speaks for himself (which he apparently isn’t ready to do as they can’t seem to find him anywhere. . .but then, he is a Mennonite and maybe he doesn’t carry a phone). Also, all this talk about the French having a field day with this is a little overstated (I’ll probably be proven wrong by L’Equippe). The French loved Floyd because he was everything Lance wasn’t. He was an “everyman” not a “Superman.” He is quiet and humble, unlike Lance. He was seen as saving this past Tour from mediocrity, so I don’t think they’re too ready to lynch the bugger.
Also, the international cycling body and WADA are responsible for testing and parameters; the French just run the race.
Hoping for a rational explanation that does not include injecting.[/quote]
Thanks for the good info bro.
That means that he got tested at least once before since he wore the yellow jersey earlier in the Tour.
[quote]etaco wrote:
Amsterdam Animal wrote:
I am not positive about this (no pun intended) but I think they test at least the top 5 finishers every stage. Landis came in second in the first ITT (excluding the prologue) to Gonchar so he would have gotten tested in stage 7.
From cycling news.com
Under the Tour de France doping controls, at the end of each stage, the stage winner and yellow jersey wearer are tested, plus at least two random selections, as well as two reserves. It’s understood the turn-around for the doping tests is usually within a week.
[/qoute]
Also, I can never remember a rider being stripped of their Tour title after the fact. There was some discussian around Pantani when his result came up but since it wasn’t during the event they couldn’t do anything unless he admitted. His positive test (which wasn’t his first) came in the Giro the year after when he was about to win it and he remained an adamant little bitch to the end -which was coke I believe.
Since this test didn’t find an unnatural metabolite, Landis can submit to testing to determine if his ratios are naturally skewed if his results were consistantly borderline. There was a track cyclist (Enlish, I believe) a few years back who did this for an inexplicable high hematocrit-- there would be no advantage to blood doiping at his distance-- and after a period of testing was given an exemption for the rule. The circumstances here are way too suspicious for that.
My guess was he did test suspension or something. I think the amount of time needed to gain physiological effect is far shorter than the time needed to accumulate noticeable amounts of muscle for a bodybuilder. He may have assumed that it would work overnight but be mostly out of his system by the end of the next stage. I’m certainly no AAS expert though.[/quote]
Yes that is true but from my earleir post “One other thing to point out is that the results were not just high in testosterone, it’s a high ratio of testosterone to epitestosterone.”
I hope he is not guilty as well but its not looking too good right now. And if someone/something put my lifetime accomplishment in a bad light and I knew without a shadow of a doubt I was innocent, you bet your ass I would be on every news channel refuting the info. Where is he?
[quote]chrismcl wrote:
Some esters of testosterone injections can present themselves in the blood within hours. So it is quite possible that he did inject something. However, I know that if I spent 130km in the saddle riding solo and practically riding for my life, my testosterone levels would probably surge a little bit. Especially after the stage - I mean fuck, who wouldn’t feel like the Alpha Male after winning that stage the way he did?
If the report had said that he tested positive for EPO, then it’d be pretty easy to write him off even without the B sample. But “unusually high testosterone levels” is extremely vague. The human body can do some extraordinary things when it needs to (lift a car off of somebody crushed under it, etc) maybe Floyd and his body figured out that he needed a boost and the gonads went to work.
So pretty much because their accusation is quite vague, I’m going to reserve judgment until they actually find used syringes with Floyd’s DNA on the pin.
Its almost like saying “normal testosterone levels are anywhere from 300 - 1000 ng/dl, your blood test showed 1001, therefore you must be on steroids.”[/quote]
If he had been taking something for his hip, the smart money would have been to clear the substance with the governing body or whatever you would do to make sure it would not and could not make you look bad.
[quote]jjoseph_x wrote:
briangodsen wrote:
Donut62 wrote:
Damn. They are going to have a field day with this. What he did was superhuman, drugs or not, and this is going to overshadow it forever.
I love how ‘high testosterone level’ is synonymous with ‘Drug Use’. There are people walking around with T Levels twice that of a normal person (just ask Bas Rutten). Should we really punish people for that? Is it fair to say, ‘you can’t take a pill to give you the same effect of what some genetically gifted person naturally has’. ‘Natural’ is a bullshit term. A situation like this only overshadows Landis’s incredible accomplishment. The guy won the tour with a broken hip. Roughly 3500 KM of pure agony. ‘High Testosterone Levels’. Give me a break.
It’s that he had abnormally high testosterone levels (and this is an endurance athlete… not the guys with the most test’ in the world). You also have to keep in mind that these guys are tested several times (not just once… so if one test is shows much higher levels than others… it’s a bit suspicious).
However, he could have been taking a steroidal anti-inflammatory drug for his hip (very common for arthitis suffers). That might explain the higher testosterone levels.
We’ll have to wait until the investigation is over to see what happens… the B samples might clear him entirely.
[/quote]
[quote]kroby wrote:
Bonds never took a drug test until 2003, quite after his homerun explosion of 1999 - 2002.[/quote]
Would you like to tell me how steroids improved Bonds’s batting eye? He was swinging at better pitches, not swinging at balls, and hitting the ball in the right spot. This has to do with better technique and practice, not the steroids. Even if he was juicing, this would not improve his batting eye and his technique.
As far as Landis, I fail to see how high test levels make him guilty by default. Humans can naturally raise their test levels while in pain, adrenaline rushes, or anger. Perhaps with his combination of the three, he jacked himself up. If it was done naturally, without steroids, then he deserved his win by making his body overcome its limitations and winning the race. Perhaps he just has naturally high levels, and with the extreme circumstances they raised even higher.
Difference in performance regarding Bonds:
1.) WHEN the bat connects with the ball – which is due to his existing incredible eye/instinct/ability – due to much increased size and strength (as a result of steroid use), ball is then hit much HARDER and flies much FARTHER, equating to more home runs than before.
2.) There IS also evidence showing that steroids can actually speed up the neurological process that regulates hand-eye coordination and reflexes. No joke.
[quote]TrainerinDC wrote:
kroby wrote:
Bonds never took a drug test until 2003, quite after his homerun explosion of 1999 - 2002.
Would you like to tell me how steroids improved Bonds’s batting eye? He was swinging at better pitches, not swinging at balls, and hitting the ball in the right spot. This has to do with better technique and practice, not the steroids. Even if he was juicing, this would not improve his batting eye and his technique.
As far as Landis, I fail to see how high test levels make him guilty by default. Humans can naturally raise their test levels while in pain, adrenaline rushes, or anger. Perhaps with his combination of the three, he jacked himself up. If it was done naturally, without steroids, then he deserved his win by making his body overcome its limitations and winning the race. Perhaps he just has naturally high levels, and with the extreme circumstances they raised even higher.
[/quote]
And Bonds was already a pretty good player to begin with. What about the steroid benefits as they relate to recovery? Being able to do it the first few months in a season is one thing but doing it consistently throughout the season is another. I think the juice def helped in that regard.
[quote]Damici wrote:
Difference in performance regarding Bonds:
1.) WHEN the bat connects with the ball – which is due to his existing incredible eye/instinct/ability – due to much increased size and strength (as a result of steroid use), ball is then hit much HARDER and flies much FARTHER, equating to more home runs than before.
2.) There IS also evidence showing that steroids can actually speed up the neurological process that regulates hand-eye coordination and reflexes. No joke.
TrainerinDC wrote:
kroby wrote:
Bonds never took a drug test until 2003, quite after his homerun explosion of 1999 - 2002.
Would you like to tell me how steroids improved Bonds’s batting eye? He was swinging at better pitches, not swinging at balls, and hitting the ball in the right spot. This has to do with better technique and practice, not the steroids. Even if he was juicing, this would not improve his batting eye and his technique.
As far as Landis, I fail to see how high test levels make him guilty by default. Humans can naturally raise their test levels while in pain, adrenaline rushes, or anger. Perhaps with his combination of the three, he jacked himself up. If it was done naturally, without steroids, then he deserved his win by making his body overcome its limitations and winning the race. Perhaps he just has naturally high levels, and with the extreme circumstances they raised even higher.
[/quote]
[quote]Damici wrote:
Difference in performance regarding Bonds:
1.) WHEN the bat connects with the ball – which is due to his existing incredible eye/instinct/ability – due to much increased size and strength (as a result of steroid use), ball is then hit much HARDER and flies much FARTHER, equating to more home runs than before.
2.) There IS also evidence showing that steroids can actually speed up the neurological process that regulates hand-eye coordination and reflexes. No joke.
[/quote]
Exactly.
[quote]TrainerinDC wrote:
kroby wrote:
Bonds never took a drug test until 2003, quite after his homerun explosion of 1999 - 2002.
Would you like to tell me how steroids improved Bonds’s batting eye? He was swinging at better pitches, not swinging at balls, and hitting the ball in the right spot. This has to do with better technique and practice, not the steroids. Even if he was juicing, this would not improve his batting eye and his technique.
[/quote]
Why, sure. It’s got nothing to do with his hand / eye coordination. It has everything to do with the distance a ball travels. Under earlier situations, many of his hits were fly-outs. Add more strength, and voila, extra distance on those fly balls turns into a home run. As this is purely speculative…
[quote]jjoseph_x wrote:
briangodsen wrote:
Donut62 wrote:
Damn. They are going to have a field day with this. What he did was superhuman, drugs or not, and this is going to overshadow it forever.
I love how ‘high testosterone level’ is synonymous with ‘Drug Use’. There are people walking around with T Levels twice that of a normal person (just ask Bas Rutten). Should we really punish people for that? Is it fair to say, ‘you can’t take a pill to give you the same effect of what some genetically gifted person naturally has’. ‘Natural’ is a bullshit term. A situation like this only overshadows Landis’s incredible accomplishment. The guy won the tour with a broken hip. Roughly 3500 KM of pure agony. ‘High Testosterone Levels’. Give me a break.
It’s that he had abnormally high testosterone levels (and this is an endurance athlete… not the guys with the most test’ in the world). You also have to keep in mind that these guys are tested several times (not just once… so if one test is shows much higher levels than others… it’s a bit suspicious).
However, he could have been taking a steroidal anti-inflammatory drug for his hip (very common for arthitis suffers). That might explain the higher testosterone levels.
We’ll have to wait until the investigation is over to see what happens… the B samples might clear him entirely.
[/quote]
I dont believe corticosteroids increase test levels.
[quote]trailrash wrote:
CC wrote:
trailrash wrote:
This is where you are wrong about my stance. I actually wouldn’t care if they were allowed to dope. And I have nothing to calm down about.
Right. That’s why on two separate occasions, in your original TDF 2006 thread, when someone brought up the issue of drug use in cycling you jumped their shit or made some smart-ass comment about it. But you don’t care, lol.
I was just replying to your stupid comment.
“Stupid” comment, lol? What, are we in 5th grade again? It was a general wondering, which I’ll say once again (if you would read properly) had more to do with my fascination with preparation than actual drug use.
Smile, buddy :-). You’ll live longer.
yes, I made these comments because they were SPECULATING that “they all do it” You would have figured that out had you “Read Properly”. Boy, guess you got me there.
It seems to me that maybe I misinterpreted what you said in you initial post, but they way you said it allowed it to be interepreted in tow different ways obviously.
sorry for interepreting your post incorrectly.
S
[/quote]
Apology accepted. Sorry for not being more clear.
Buds?