Halloween

Before the Fall,
originally uploaded by scifitwin.

We survived, but barely. There's nothing that will motivate a child to exercise and walk for miles than pounds and pounds of candy.

I, being a diabetic, have been in a contact coma for the last few hours. So, I need to ride my bike today to shake off the sugar in the house.

Please Kill Me

Are those floppy-eared dogs bouncing on yoga balls? What the fuck? Damn the Internet and the ease of finding crap like this so easily (Stereogum deserves punishment for this one). I now have auralthelioma.



Here, rinse and spit with this, with a touch of Levon Helm:

Billy, Don't Be a Hiro

Good news for Snowcrash fans. Really good news. Alarmingly cool, yet disturbingly weird news. But cool! In a strange way.

At least this is the kind of stuff they are doing and not something like Soylent Green.

Oscar the Grouch?

Possible Tour de France Winner Oscar Pereiro is proving my point about how screwed up this process is.

Let's look at the steps according to Oscar, and apparently the Tour organizers (not assuming that they knew Floyd tested positive before the end of the tour, because of course a doping scandal on top of a doping scandal is just fantastic publicity for the Tour . . . I mean, why not let the guy win and then take things away? Makes more sense, right?).

The World According to Oscar
1. Floyd Landis wins.
2. Floyd tests positive, is suspended. Fair enough.
3. Floyd relinquishes the jersey.
4. Oscar wins.
5. Floyd disappears forever, never to be seen again so that Oscar can be the twentieth greatest Spanish cyclist ever (he did ride off a mountain last year while eating a sandwich). If that.

This whole process according to Oscar is swift and if guilt is without any doubt, fair. Except for one thing. Guilt isn't without any doubt. Or it shouldn't be. And that damn hearing where the rider has a chance to prove innocence, or faulty testing, or a French conspiracy (which is totally true, unless you're a sissy). If there is true balance in the process, then the accused rider has a chance at innocence. Hell, if this is all done right, WADA, the UCI and ASO would be following the same rules.

So, in the World According to Oscar, since he is deserving winner of course, Floyd is guilty, guilty, guilty.

But suppose he's not. Then you have the following steps in Oscar's world.

6. Floyd proves his innocence.
7. Floyd is declared the rightful winner of the Tour. ASO, the UCI and WADA, all ashamed of how hypocritical they are in a variety of situations, giving passes to guys who have "asthma" but going after guys for butt cream or because their dog might have visited a Spanish doctor, all give Floyd a gift certificate to Cracker Barrel. Oh, and the yellow jersey.
8. Oscar is demoted back to second place.
9. The Tour, of course, doesn't look like a farce because they keep changing the results.
10. We all laugh.

Look, again, not saying that you shouldn't go after the guilty riders. All I'm saying is if there's a process, follow it. You can't execute a guy before the trial. Unless you're in a secret CIA prison.

Right? Maybe I'm just stupid, but it seems like the riders aren't the only ones who cheat the system and ignore rules. It looks like the governing bodies also take a very loose stance on said rules.

WADA You Mean?

Yes, this is about Floyd Landis. The great shame of U.S. cycling these days, it seems. And, if he’s guilty, rightly so. If he’s a cheater he needs to be dealt with accordingly. Just like all suspected dopers, Floyd is denying that he cheated. It’s a likely story. After all, it’s rare that anyone admits to being a cheat. Even if they are caught red handed.

Now, I’ll be honest I have no idea what I’m talking about here. I know nothing of UCI, WADA or any other rules. I’m just having an emotional reaction to what I think is a situation that unfairly assumes guilt and leaves little room for innocence. And, let’s face it, cycling has a checkered past so it’s not surprising that there is very little trust for a cyclist.

For the record, I want to believe Floyd and am inclined to believe him.

Again, this is all emotional. I am not speaking with any sense of authority. Just sadness and confusion. If you truly want to keep up with this case, make sure you check Trust But Verify, the online clearing house for all things Landis, all the time.

According to the UCI (cycling’s governing body), the organizers of the Tour de France and the leader of the World Anti-Doping Agency, Floyd did it. In fact, they were pronouncing his guilt before Landis had even seen the results of his own tests. Worse, they were touting to the media that he should be drawn and quartered before his B sample was tested. According to the rules that these organizations themselves set up to protect an athlete from a false positive, no one should have been told about a positive test until the B sample was analyzed. Instead, the story was in the media before the rider himself even knew. Go figure.

Now Floyd must defend himself to the anti-doping agency, his cycling federation and to the public. Only, the problem with that is the public has already made up its mind based on news reports that, in some cases, weren’t even reporting actual facts. Here’s what the public knows.

1. Floyd won the Tour.
2. Floyd cheated.
3. If he says he didn’t cheat he’s lying.
4. Any possible recourse he can follow is just a ploy.
5. If he’s trying to prove the test was flawed, he’s guilty and trying to get off on a technicality.
6. If he’s innocent then he has to prove it.
7. But he can’t prove it using any explanation that involves someone else giving him something, the test being flawed, that there was a natural explanation, nor can he say that the lab screwed up. Because none of these will prove he’s innocent, it only shows how guilty the lying son of a bitch is.

Here’s my problem with this. According to the court of public opinion, Floyd has been convicted. However, he still has the right to prove his innocence at a hearing with the USADA early next year, which is why he is currently mounting his defense and allowing a bunch of cycling geeks to analyze his test results. So, obviously, if he didn’t dope he can argue that at the hearing, right?

Not exactly. You see, he really only has two options: 1. That the test was right, but he accidentally took the banned substance, making him an idiot or 2. The tests were wrong, or compromised. Option two doesn’t clear Floyd, exactly. It just shows that there was a mistake.

So, if I understand the rules here, no matter what Floyd is guilty. He’s either guilty on purpose, guilty by accident or guilty but going to get away with it due to a faulty test or sample.

I’m not saying that Floyd is innocent. I’m just astounded by a process that is supposed to be a form of “justice”. Guilty athletes must be dealt with quickly and harshly. They mustn’t be allowed to cheat. However, no process is infallible. There is a chance that an innocent athlete could be caught up in a mistake, a lab error, or falsely accused. But, according to these guidelines, there is no innocence. According to these guidelines if you’re standing in front of a hearing you are guilty of something.

I guess that’s my problem. If, by chance, Floyd is telling the truth and he did not dope, there is nothing he can really do to prove it. The samples are gone; he can’t ask for a retest, he can’t pee again for that particular day. He can’t ask for the samples to be re-examined. All he can do is answer the accusations. There’s really no way for him to prove that he did not take anything before Stage 17.

In my mind he’s screwed. If he’s guilty, then forget it. It’s over. If he’s innocent and he didn’t do it, it’s too late. The only way he can get off is by proving that the lab screwed up. But in the eyes of the public, he’s still going to be the doper who got off on a technicality.

I guess that’s my problem. How can one defend one’s self in a situation where you can only defend yourself with “I cheated by accident” or “My pee was mishandled”.

Shouldn’t there be a system that could be used to protect an athlete who might actually be innocent? Again, I’m not saying that Floyd is. But what if he is? What if there’s another guy out there who gets caught up in something because samples were messed up?

It’s simply too late for them. The “lab messed up” defense is problematic because, even if they did and you are 100% clean, the public has already decided based on the accusations that you are guilty. Hell, I’ve read arguments that Floyd is guilty simply because he’s defending himself. Huh? If he hides, people assume he’s guilty. If he puts out all the evidence against him for people to analyze and distribute then, obviously, he’s guilty because it’s all a ploy.

So, if that’s the case, why have the hearing? Why give an athlete any opportunity to pretend they aren’t guilty? Because, based on the very system that’s supposed to “protect” them, they are guilty liars.

A Clarification

It's come to my attention that I need to clarify my comments in my previous post. Something, to follow the current fashion, got all roostered up. While I find Carlton's recap of the Lim defense admirable and feel that it is something that should be discussed along with the possible artificial elements that could have lead to Floyd Landis' dramatic Stage 17 ride, that was not the quote I was referring to. Though, it's a compelling two minute argument on Carlton's part (for the record, I like Carlton, he's a passionate, smart individual).

The quote I was specifically referring to was Carlton's turn of a phrase "Man Juice Patch". I found that funny. In the midst of all the commentary on metabolites, lab errors, calibration and more, I just find the phrasing he used funny. It felt like he brought things back down to my level with that.

Freshly Squeezed Quote of the Day

The Spokesmen Podcast, a kind of round table discussion of cycling with some of the best cycling podcasters, covers the release of Floyd Landis' evidence last week. In doing so, they discuss the possible reasons other than testosterone for Floyd's amazing ride on Stage 17.

Carlton Reid discusses what Allen Lim sees as Floyd's secrets behind the stage win:

1. Descending: Floyd gained all his time on the downhill portions. He's a former mountain biker and he proved his skills.

2. Power Output: If you look at the data from that ride, Floyd's wattage was similar to a training ride. He kept his core body temperature down and was able to ride like a demon because he was comfortable, hydrated and motivated. In fact, looking at the numbers, he didn't even do that stellar of a ride. His numbers matched those of a typical training ride.

3. Mistakes: Floyd's opponents made a lot of mistakes and Floyd took advantage of them.

But that's all moot. Floyd's innocence or guilt comes down to the discussion of the contents of two vials of urine now. However, Carlton really put this whole situation into perspective with one key quote.

I can't justify it by typing. So I've edited down his comments to this key moment. Listen all the way through. It's worth it. This clip gives you the full context. The key quote is at the very end. The word "juice" is involved.

Now go listen to the podcast. This episode has tons of great content, beyond man juice. David, of the Fredcast, does a fantastic job all around producing the podcast. In fact, listen to both. David puts out some great shows. Yet, why he didn't seize on this quote as the title for this episode, I don't know.