Le Tour de France

[StevieB]

Nope, he is entitled to a defence. Until now all we know is that abnormally high levels of testosterone have been found, not how they got there. He may well have cheated, he may well be innocent. But until he has a chance to defend himself I feel that its a shame the team have sacked him.

There are ways in which the samples could have high levels without him doping, the team have presumed that he has cheated and consequently sacked him. That is not innocent until proved guilty, it is guilty until proven otherwise.

OK, its not a court case in which the usual rules apply, but while there is a chance the samples could be illegal by non-cheating means (ie naturally high levels, by product of medication for his hip, etc) and if that is subsequently proven his winning the TDF will stand, then he is being judged before a defence is heard.

I do not know which way it will go, and hope for the sake of the sport he can clear his name. He will be forever tainted now however, even if subsequently found innocent.

Steve.

 

[Noel]

Yes Stevie, apparently the UCI have not declared Pereiro the winner.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/other_s ... 254402.stm
Strange how Pereiro has said he is happy being the winner of the 2006 event.
The whole thing is a total mess.

 

[johnelliott]

Nope, he is entitled to a defence. Until now all we know is that abnormally high levels of testosterone have been found, not how they got there. He may well have cheated, he may well be innocent. But until he has a chance to defend himself I feel that its a shame the team have sacked him.

There are ways in which the samples could have high levels without him doping, the team have presumed that he has cheated and consequently sacked him. That is not innocent until proved guilty, it is guilty until proven otherwise.

OK, its not a court case in which the usual rules apply, but while there is a chance the samples could be illegal by non-cheating means (ie naturally high levels, by product of medication for his hip, etc) and if that is subsequently proven his winning the TDF will stand, then he is being judged before a defence is heard.

I do not know which way it will go, and hope for the sake of the sport he can clear his name. He will be forever tainted now however, even if subsequently found innocent.

Steve.

How the levels came to be as high as they were is an interesting discussion point, but it's not the point of the rules. The rules say how high a level of testosterone is allowed, and his was too high, as two seperate tests proved. Whether the levels are natural or not isn't at issue, althugh you may feel it should be.
The only possible defence would be something along the lines of- the tests were inaccurate, or maybe the samples had been tampered with, or weren't his, something along those lines. That the levels were natural just won't do it

John

 

[Noel]

John, appreciate your interest in the situation. In an ideal world your view would make sense, that is, samples showed excessive or irregular amounts of testoserone therefore Landis had doped and is stripped of his title, banned and castrated by the cycling world and the media. Alas things are not so simple.
Putting aside his initial claims that his high testoserone level was natural (he has now said that he was advised to say this to the media by his Spanish advisers and has since retracted the claim). The basis of his defense now is that a mistake has been made in the testing procedures, that the test lab did not adhere to the rules concerning anonymity and objectivity. Furthermore he rightly has claimed that the identity/owner of the urine sample should not have been made public so early. Granted, alot of these claims will have no bearing on the core issue - did he dope?

Doping has been a thorn in the side of the sport for many years and since the Festina scandal in '98 has been a regular side show to the main event.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/special_repo ... 134842.stm
The situation was further inflamed as a result of "Operación Puerto", a sporting drugs investigation being conducted by the Spanish police which resulted in the banning of over 50 riders (including the favourite) from this year's TDF. The basis for this action was that the riders in question appeared on a list that was found when the police raided the offices of a Dr Fuentes and found DIY blood banks, EPO etc. This doctor specialised in "assisting" athletes of all descriptions in "improving" performance in their particular sport (so expect to hear more concerning field and track athletes, swimmers etc). As far as I'm aware the riders were not given the opportunity of due process and were in effect guilty by association although a few riders managed to get into the race by virtue of legal arguement in court. My own personal view is that some or maybe most of the riders thrown out were indeed doping.
My last point is that the anti-doping regime and WADA (World Anti Doping Agency) has been seen not to be consistant in their testing procedures, have, at times, carried out sample testing using un-proved or out dated technology and have failed to be seen as transparent despite what the UCI (world cycling authority) claim. Furthermore WADA has resisted calls that sample testing be carried out by 2 different facilities in order that total objectivity and fairness can be achieved.
So essentially a lot of the cycling world has no faith in WADA and their testing and technical standards. This can also be said for the UCI and their chief Pat McQuaid and to some extent the TDF organisers (the ISO).

So John, there you have it in a rather large nutshell. As I've mentioned several time before I still have an open mind about whither Floyd Landis was doping or not. Difficult to have belief in the kangaroo court system that the cycling authorites use.

Noel

 

[johnelliott]

samples showed excessive or irregular amounts of testoserone therefore Landis had doped

But I didn't say that, and it isn't the point I was trying to make. For the avoidance of doubt, what I am saying is that he had an illegal level of testosterone in his urine, and that that is why he has been disqualified. I am not saying that he must have intentionally or otherwise doped, all I am saying, and I presume the authorities too, is that he had an illegally high level

Same thing with drink driving, one isn't prosecuted for drinking and then driving, one is prosecuted for having an illegallly high level of alcohol in the blood. How it got there is not taken into consideration

John

 

[wrightclan]

samples showed excessive or irregular amounts of testoserone therefore Landis had doped

But I didn't say that, and it isn't the point I was trying to make. For the avoidance of doubt, what I am saying is that he had an illegal level of testosterone in his urine, and that that is why he has been disqualified. I am not saying that he must have intentionally or otherwise doped, all I am saying, and I presume the authorities too, is that he had an illegally high level

Same thing with drink driving, one isn't prosecuted for drinking and then driving, one is prosecuted for having an illegallly high level of alcohol in the blood. How it got there is not taken into consideration

John

But as regards tesosterone, how it got there is supposed to be taken into consideration. WADA's own rules state that the ratio test is only to be used to determine if further testing is necessary. Such further testing is done to determine if it is natural or synthetic, and if the sportsperson in question regularly produces such levels.

Unfortunately, that course of action was not followed by the lab in question, the Tour organisers, Dick Pound of the WADA, or even Landis' Phonak team

Testosterone is naturally produced by a person's body; alcohol is not. Therefore your drink driving analogy isn't relevant.

Brad

 

[wrightclan]

Just found from a number of sources, including the BBC, that he did not have a high level of testosterone at all. He had an exceedingly low level of epitestosterone; thus producing the high ratio. :-k

Brad

 

[Paul Chapman]

The plot thickens :? :? :?

Paul