Misc. Cycling Notes

A big thanks to David at The Fredcast for the shout out on his podcast this week. David gave the Tour de Stooges a quick nod in his upcoming rides section. I should note that in his email in response to my suggestion (which I managed to delete along with all of my email that was still on the server yesterday afternoon, so if I didn't respond it's because I'm a bit of an idiot) David mentioned that a Monty Python themed ride would be equally fun, as well as equally confounding to wives. I'm happy to say that my wife, however, would welcome it. She can sing "I'm a Lumberjack" in its entirety.

Spouses aside, I think David actually has a great idea. It could be set up much the same as the Tour de Stooges. However, here's the big difference: At some point while you were at a stop refilling your water bottle, three guys dressed in cycling kits would come running by, pretending to pedal their imaginary bikes while two guys behind them made clicking noises that sound like the whirring of a chain over gears.

David is living proof of what Podcasting can accomplish. He produces, week in and week out, the best cycling podcast out there. The one guy, squeezing podcasting between working, training and family life, puts out a consistently better show than some of the pros out there. And, if that's not enough, he produces a bi-weekly cycling round table called The Spokesmen, with some of the best voices in the cycling business (including one of the wittiest, Carlton Reid). Both are frequently the highlights in the week of this bored freelancer.

On to doping. Of course.

My buddy Patrick Lefevre is being accused of being knee deep in doping. He denies it, of course, because he couldn't possibly be involved with anything so wrong and terrible. Of course not. Lefevre is the guy, after all, who pushed to ban Discover from the League of Honest Cycling Teams for their signing of Ivan Basso. And, if I'm not mistaken, as soon as Floyd Landis' A sample came back I believe he suggested that Landis should be stripped of his title, banned from cycling, denied a passport, banned from Europe, have his head shaved, be forced to listen to Barry Manilow, eat fried worms, kept out of the baseball hall of fame, have his Internet access shut off, taken outside and beaten, sleep with the fishes and be repeatedly kicked in the groin while being asked, "How's your T/E ratio now bitch?"

My point being, and always has been, that Lefevre has been talking out of both sides of his mouth for years. He condemns people left and right, acts like the Minister of Right Living and then gives a pass to his pet cyclist Johan Museeuw. Case in point? Museeuw has been under doping suspicion for years. Fair enough. Without evidence, he shouldn't be shuffled out of the sport, right? Except that, the Belgian cycling federation banned Museeuw for two years for being implicated in a doping scandal. He's banned from working in cycling.

According to Lefevre's rules, Museeuw should be treated the same as Landis. He certainly wouldn't hire a guy who is implicated in a doping scandal to work on his team, even if it's not as a racer. Right? Not really. Patrick claims that the suspension is "symbolic" so Museeuw continues to work for Quick-Step in a PR capacity. I doubt that will change now that Museeuw has admitted to doping late in his career. You see, there's nothing the cycling likes more than an "honest" doper.

Both sides of the mouth, Patrick. Both sides. Keep up your posturing and it'll be clear you're speaking out of another orifice.

My point? Nothing, really. Except that I'm #2 in the google search for Patrick Lefevre Doping.

I hope I'm not one of the guys he sues over these new stories. I've never said he gives people drugs. I'm just saying he can't go around condemning one doper and giving another happy slaps in the team hotel.

The Emperor Has No Clothes

Ah, little Dickie Pound. He's slicker than a greased pig. But Dan at Rant Your Head Off has taken the time to shine a light on Mr. Pound using this weekend's New York Times article and finds that advancing his name as the arbitrator of clean living and sport doesn't actually use facts to prove his point. If the facts don't support his stance, he'll just make them up.

Again, I have to ask, what price must be paid for clean sport? Are we subscribing to the old adage of "You can't make an omelete without breaking a few eggs?"

The problem for me is that the man who the media uses as the authority on anti-doping because he is the head of WADA. But, in this case, it's like using Charles Foster Kane as a luminary for journalistic integrity because he owned a few papers (that he's fictional isn't really something we should consider).

Once again, where does the truth lay in these doping cases? And how does history end up viewing dopers.

Turns out, according to some cycling fans, if you die on Mount Ventoux while doped to the gills on speed, you can still be a hero (and get a monument, for that matter). If you are Eddy Merckx, it doesn't matter if you tested positive twice in your career. You're still the king. And Jaques Antequil? Well, hell, he liked to say you can't win the Tour de France on mineral water alone. Richard Virenque? Still a national hero. Johan Museeuw? Actually banned from working in cycling because of doping. Yet, somehow he still gets to work for Patrick Lefevre and is still vaunted for his brilliant rides in the classics. Patrick Lefevre? Well, he can employ his old pet and still get to argue about the ethics of hiring Ivan Basso. Go figure.

These guys all are considered giants in cycling. No one questions their results in other races and, in some cases, their past infractions are swept under the rug. But Floyd Landis? He comes up with a strange Testosterone ratio and cycling whipes his record clean, drums him out and destroys his career. Paris-Nice? Of course, he had to dope there. In fact, when he rode in his first mountain bike race as a kid, wearing sweatpants, you know he couldn't do that on Tang and Flintstones vitamins alone. Right? He's a cheat. Dick Pound says so.

What is it cycling? Is doping a problem the plagues the sport? If so, aren't all dopers doing harm to the sport? Event the legends?

Doping is a problem in sport. It has been for some time now. And the guilty should be punished accordingly and the innocent should have a fair chance. Tests should not be considered infallable and the accused deserve a fair chance to defend themselves.

One would hope that the man who punishes the guilty would have a closer relationship to the truth than Mr. Pound.

Grass Roots

I know my regular readers (all 12 of you) all think I'm insane for my war on the alphabet (USADA, WADA), and you cycling fans (all 2 of you) think I'm barking up the wrong tree, but I honestly think the Anti-doping system is broken and chasing the wrong objectives. The more I learn about them, their standards and absurd lack of respect for their own codes, the more discouraged I get.

Rant Your Head Off has a fantastic summary and action items for those of you who wonder if our Federal tax dollars are being properly spent on the current anti-doping system. I suspect if you did a little digging, you'd discover for yourself that it's, how shall I put this gently . . . it's Borked.

Visit Rant. Talk to your congress critters. Combating doping in sport is an important endeavor. Let's not allow WADA and the USADA keep using arcane, arbitrary punishments and kangaroo court tactics.

Let's face it, for groups that are dedicated to fighting athletes who give themselves an unfair advantage to win, USADA and WADA certainly have given themselves an unfair advantage in order to win their cases.

Rich Men Want to be King

If you’ve been reading this blog since this summer, you’ve read my roller-coaster relationship with Floyd Landis. If not, here’s a summary:

July: Holy Shit! Go Floyd Go!
August: Anger. Remorse
September: Saddness
October: But wait . . . Hmmm.
November: Bring the system down!!! (I haven’t shifted from this. Test? Yes. Get rid of cheaters? Yes. Are we doing it the right way? No.)

Now, here in December, I’ve had quite a bit of time to digest the whole thing. I would go back and forth between did he, didn’t he? Would he, wouldn’t he? Why? Why? Why? If you don’t care, skip to the end and check out the music mix I’ve made.

I’ve decided that, after nearly half a year of this, it’s time to take a definitive stance. After reviewing the evidence, the constant PR battle, and posturing from Floyd to the lab, to the aptly named Dick Pound to seemingly brain-dead Australian teens, I’ve decided on my stance.

Using the basic legal tenet of “Beyond a Reasonable Doubt” I have decided that I’m in the Free Floyd camp. I have decided that I support Floyd 100% in his battle to clear his name. I have more than reasonable doubt. If this were a criminal case, it would have been thrown out. But it's not. It seems more like Woody Allen's Bananas.

Am I naive? Probably. However, if you follow the story, maybe not so much. There’s a lot more going on than A and B samples here. For example, if you lined up the WADA labs and looked at their criteria for a positive test for Testosterone levels, they would all agree right? Regardless of where Floyd was tested, he would have been drummed out of the sport no matter what, right?

Not so much. But I won’t go into that. Instead I’ll send you to the sources:

Trust But Verify
LandisCase Wiki
LA Times Series of articles on WADA/USADA. Pt. 1, Pt. 2 (troubling stuff here)

From those sources, you will be able to find everything you need to know about Floyd’s case. The good, the bad, the ugly. If you follow through you’ll find yourself going through the same stages I have gone through and you may realize Floyd has gotten the shaft. Take the time and inform yourself between what you've read on SI.com and saw on Bryant Gumbel. There's a lot going on here.

Will he be found innocent? No. There’s not a chance in hell. Gandhi would have been found guilty for eating on a hunger strike in this system. Even if they could prove he hadn’t eaten, the arbitrators would have ruled him “Hungry, but still suspended.” But I like an underdog.

So, since I’m an official Floydinista now, I’ve made a Floyd Landis musical mix on RadioSFT*. On it you will hear songs meant to spur Floyd on in battle. He’s on a suicide mission and so the songs are all about that. Angry, worried, and defiant. It begins with the song Floyd sang to himself on the disputed stage to Morzine and ends with a rallying cry.

And yes, copies are available on request to select individuals. (Hey, it’s the holidays. I can’t spend my days sending everyone a CD.)

For those not familiar with The Negro Problem, please go here before you call the PC police.