Jenn Martinelli Blogging in Boston

Jim wrote at 2007-09-27 09:14:

You're went to college, but your comment sounds more like those I hear from high school students. Maybe you should exercise some of the critical thinking you were supposed to be learning to do at Smith and look more carefully at the Landis case. It's not as black and white as you apparently believe it is.

Jenn wrote at 2007-09-27 09:23:

Yes Jim, "I'm went" to college. I'm not sure how my comments sound like a high school student, or why that's an insult unless you're implying that high school students are stupid. Which part did you have a problem with - the part where I said cyclists shouldn't dope? Are you a Tyler Hamilton fan?

You're right, I wasn't a party to the minutiae of the case, but if we're supposed to believe in the system, then we have to believe that the evidence was examined and he was proved guilty. If you don't believe in the system that's another issue.

Based on the facts I've heard, which is all the facts I'm ever going to be party to since I'm not involved in the case directly, he sure sounds guilty to me. If he's guilty, then he's an ass. And he's one of the people ruining the sport for everyone. Period.

Liz wrote at 2007-09-27 10:15:

"if we're supposed to believe in the system, then we have to believe that the evidence was examined and he was proved guilty. If you don't believe in the system that's another issue."

That's exactly ENTIRE issue.

Ken wrote at 2007-09-27 10:40:

You are absolutely wrong about Floyd. All of the lawyers I know who have actually looked at this are in a state of disbelief. He may have been guilty but it sure wasn't proven.

He might yet be able to prove his innocence. The system is broken and needs to be fixed.

Jenn wrote at 2007-09-27 10:56:

Wow, suddenly so much interest in my little post from last week. I wonder how it got noticed.

Anyway, everyone is entitled to their opinion of course but unfortunately only Floyd Landis himself actually knows if he cheated or not. He says he's innocent. A lot of people believe him. A lot of people don't.

Hey, Liz, I loved rooting for him too last year, I thought it was the coolest thing. Unfortunately, what I said holds true about doping in general in the sport. Even if Floyd is innocent, plenty aren't, and it's ruining the sport for everyone else. This year's tour was a travesty. I still like watching but the sport really needs to get it together, it's a real problem. It's disheartening. You have to wonder every time someone does something amazing whether it's real or not.

Hey, I'll go on record as saying if Floyd is innocent then I hope that can be proven and he's vindicated. I just think it's highly unlikely, which is my opinion, and no more or less educated than anyone else who gets all their information from the media.

Jim wrote at 2007-09-27 11:28:

No, Jenn, I don't believe high school students are stupid. I just think they haven't had as much experience with critical thinking as those who have gone to college, so their arguments tend to be more along the lines of "I heard that Floyd was a guilty jerk", which is more or less what your post is saying.

You've pretty much said that you "believe in the system". I'm calling you on that belief. Spend some time learning about the system and its severe lack of due process and respect for the rights of the accused. Then your posts will be better informed.

Dirk Chesterfield wrote at 2007-09-27 12:16:

To those who want to believe Floyd you might want to see this review of the Landis book;http://www.elviskennedy.com/posfalse/page16.html

You can see that Landis has no qualms about lying.

Rob wrote at 2007-09-27 12:37:

First of all Ken, I don't know which lawyers you know ('all of the lawyers I know...') but I would be careful about trying to argue that the lawyers you know are a representative sample of the population of all lawyers. I'm sure all of the lawyers that Floyd Landis knows are in a state of disbelief too. Of course all of the lawyers on the side of the USADA agree with the result. The trouble here is the use of the work 'all' which is misleading because you are talking about all of some, which isn't in fact all.

I've read a lot about this too. Essentially the findings were that there were problems with the testing procedures, more specifically the execution of those procedures, and that those errors affected primarily one of two samples (the less definitive of the two tests). It was determined that the problems were not sufficient enough to overturn the finding.

People who claim that the system is broken and must be fixed need to keep in mind that we're not talking about one system here, we're talking about multiple and indepdendent systems (LLND of course, the UCI and USADA - both of which had an opportunity to consider the results of the findings, and the independent US arbitration panel).

Obviously steps should be taken toward eliminating any possible sources of error in testing procedure but there is no process that is entirely free of human error. This can't be used as some sort of blanket defense protecting all cheaters and criminals from ever being held accountable for their actions.

It is true that I have heard a lot of quotes that very harshly criticize the handling of this case, from the initial findings to this latest result.

> For the panel to find in favor of USADA when, with respect to so many issues, USADA did not manage to prove even the most basic parts of their case shows that this system is fundamentally flawed.

> This is a miscarriage of justice.

> The majority panel's decision is a disappointment, but particularly so because it failed to address the joint impact of the many errors that the AFLD laboratory committed in rendering this false positive.

> To take each of these errors singly is to ignore the total falsity of the result. The majority panel has disregarded the testimony of Mr. Landis' experts.

> I am innocent and we proved I am innocent.

Among many, many others. The problem is that all of these quotes are from Floyd Landis, people attached to Landis, or supporters. It cannot be said that everyone involved in the case against Landis is somehow a Landis detractor. I would very seriously doubt that somehow this entire process has been seeded with people who have some interest in destroying Floyd Landis.

The fact that Landis wants us to believe he is innnocent is not so surprising.

There is this odd phenomenon that seems to be at play here. When someone asserts a position in the face of evidence to the contrary over a long period of time, that original position seems somehow more credible, even if there is no substance to it. This is why kooky religions that are thousands of years old are widely considered plausible and kooky religions that are only decades old are generally disregarded.

Let's also keep in mind that before Landis picked this 'the system is broken' tack he claimed:

• That his testoterone levels are extraordinarily high naturally. Not only is this complete nonsense given the levels that were revealed by the testing, but it the presence of synthetic testosterone in his body meant that this was not going to be a good tenable defense for him.
• He then moved on to saying the test results were a result of dehydration
• then thyroid medication
• and the conspiracy theories

Over the years, attacking the science has proven to be a very good approach. So at least he finally found the right story to tell.

The vast majority, nearly all, of these characters eventually admit to cheating. In this sense, the tests seem to work pretty well, flaws and all. Are we to believe that Rasmussen is innocent (because he says he is, though much of what he's said in attempting to explain his behavior is provably untrue), or that Hamilton is a chimera (despite medical evidence to the contrary), Vinokourov (with the defense that 'you would have to be crazy to do what I am accused of having done...').

None of the professional cyclists, people who are themselves subject to these tests, are rushing to Landis' aid. I am quite sure that the vast majority of the athletes believe the results and in my mind that is not insignificant.

Should we trust the system? In this case absolutely.

Jenn wrote at 2007-09-27 12:50:

"...I don't believe high school students are stupid. I just think they haven't had as much experience with critical thinking as those who have gone to college, so their arguments tend to be more along the lines of "I heard that Floyd was a guilty jerk", which is more or less what your post is saying."

No, I came to the conclusion that Floyd Landis is a guilty jerk after THINKING CRITICALLY about it. I'm sorry that disagreeing with your opinion is grounds for deciding I don't know how to use my brain. I'm pretty sure it's safe to say that not everyone who disagrees with you in life is mentally deficient or incapable of thinking critically.

"You've pretty much said that you "believe in the system". I'm calling you on that belief. Spend some time learning about the system and its severe lack of due process and respect for the rights of the accused. Then your posts will be better informed."

I'm probably exactly as informed as you, Jim. I follow the tour every year. I read everything I saw about this case, etc. I didn't just happen across a random story and decide, "hey, that guy's a jerk."

Craig wrote at 2007-09-27 13:06:

Jenn, http://www.usada.org/what/management/arbitration.aspx Don't read the AP hype. Read the arbitration ruling, and the dissenting view and then make up your mind. Floyd was found guilty after having the panel throw out his A results. Granted, this is not a US court, which is what has lawyers confused, as in any civil court this case would have been tossed.

Drew wrote at 2007-09-27 15:08:

Jenn, Better than Craig's suggestion, perhaps you should go to the USOC pressbox and read the hearing transcripts and form your own decision rather than take what the mainstream media feeds you.

I have linked the URL to the Landis hearing docs to my name.

There are still major parts of the mainstream media still reporting that he tested positive for high levels of testosterone so if they can't get the facts right, how can we as the public believe them.

As far as the system goes, anyone who blindly believes in any system is a fool. 231 years ago, had people followed that mentality, we'd still be British colonies. Get your head out of the sand, or are you one of those people who believes that there are no corrupt cops, nobody has ever been falsely convicted of a crime, and that OJ didn’t get away with murder?

Melissa wrote at 2007-09-27 16:56:

ha-ha-ha!

You're such a controversial blogger - who knew?! What with your knitting and Fratellis music, it should have been obvious!

I love when people take offense to a post and then think they can change your mind (or should I type you're) with their argumentative prowess of calling you a slightly-stupid-sophomoric-conclusion-jumper! Guilty or not, feverishly defending Landis to a Boston area blogger isn't going to change anything.

Try decaf people. And maybe spell/grammar check for good measure.

This cracks me up!

Jenn wrote at 2007-09-27 17:03:

No Drew, I am not "one of those people who believes that there are no corrupt cops,..." etc.

I am one of those people who believes that if you feel so strongly that there has been an injustice done, then you should do something about it besides accusing people who disagree with you of being simpletons or puppets of the media.

snake wrote at 2007-09-27 20:29:

let's get down to some brass tacks on the system you want to believe in.

for starters, the athlete gets to pick one arbiter, usada gets to pick two. not so surprisingly the vote came down just as it was stacked: two to one against floyd.

then consider that athletes have NEVER WON an arbitration. it's 35 and 0 for usada.

would you expect a total shut-out in a process that's supposedly intended to protect the rights of the accused ?

the system is not what you think.

whether or not you think floyd doped, at least he made the proceedings open to the public so that we all could see what happens.

and oh what a stunning show it was.

John Geoghegan wrote at 2007-09-27 21:08:

I'm Will's dad. So far, nobody who has posted here, including the blogger, seem to know anything about the facts of the case, the findings or the science, or the method by which the majority of the arbitrators were led to their opinion. Too bad. I'm reminded of Watergate. There was the break-in, followed by the reporting in the Washington Post, followed by the hearings, followed by the book, followed by the movie. Everybody believes the movie.

Rob wrote at 2007-09-28 03:54:

Tyler Hamilton was guilty as all hell. I figure out the most obvious explanation is the team donor for Phonak switched the blood bags by accident for Hamilton and his teammate. They both tested positive for autologous blood doping. Cant figure out why Floyd tested positive. No clear explanation. Doesn't make sense for him to test for that. No reason to take it for one stage after you cracked. And it mysteriously disappears. He takes it one stage and doesn't from stage 18 through the end nor before 17. He was busted after the tour finished and only used one stage. ??? How convenient for the french lab. A joke and the system got exposed. Most logical explanation for Floyd is either the lab muffed or someone tampered with his sample. It's more likely considering the circumstances and the how it played out. They did not prove his guilt beyond any reasonable doubt. Ruling said labwork stunk and warned those results would not hold up in future hearings but for this hearing we'll give you a pass with a stern warning. LOL. Could anyone feel good about that result. Unless you know the system is fixed and want it to remain fixed. Yes riders dope but a greater travesty has presened itself. The clean athlete getting raped.

Jenn wrote at 2007-09-28 08:44:

Well what are the mysterious facts that everyone is missing? What's the answer? Did the lab frame him? Did his body somehow generate synthetic testosterone? Maybe the people who know all the facts can enlighten those of us who don't.

That's not even really the point. I'm not claiming to know all the facts. The only person who really knows all the facts is Landis. I'm basing my opinion on the information available to me, and since it's just an opinion on my blog and I'm not, for instance, an arbiter in the case, then I guess Floyd Landis doesn't really have anything to worry about from me.

Lucky for him, my opinion doesn't mean squat really. And lucky for the USADA no one else's opinion here does either.

snake wrote at 2007-09-28 16:12:

the mystery is how he was found guilty when the evidence seemed so dubious.

which ... really isn't much of a mystery. the anti-doping associations have an iron-clad psuedo-justice system that assures they don't have to lose.

the heart of floyd's case is that the french lab LNDD was incompetent: that technicians didn't know how to operate their equipment, didn't follow documented procedure, they weren't properly blinded (one of the testers admitted she knew who's samples she was testing), they didn't keep track of where the samples were at all times, they cherry pick for desired results, leak their findings and they don't provide for independent verification of results. in fact, within ADA there's a "code of conduct" forbidding any other lab from questioning results.

it seemed to me and many others that he proved his case. note that even the arbiters threw out the results of the (famous) initial testosterone screening. but, they upheld a secondary test - which is only called for if the results of the first screening is positive. it should never have happened, and in the words of the dissenting arbiter: "If the LNDD (French lab) 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?"

whether you care or not care about floyd, i'm interested in knowing how pissed off you might get at USADA and WADA, if you knew how ruthless, underhanded and just plain obnoxious they can be. carrying on like they're the good guys.

John Geoghegan wrote at 2007-10-06 00:54:

To Jenn, who claims only Floyd knows the facts. Not true. All the facts, all the science, all the testimony is there if you care to read and learn. 1,800 pages of testimony and laboratory records that virtually every qualified and informed person in the scientific, forensics, and biomedical communities is assailing as exonerating Landis and totally contadictory with the findings of the arbitration panel. Become informed. Knowledge is power.