Basso to join Discovery team

Basso to join Discovery team

There are 446 comments on the Houston Chronicle story from Nov 8, 2006, titled Basso to join Discovery team. In it, Houston Chronicle reports that:

Italy's Ivan Basso, arguably the world's top stage racer and the runner-up to Lance Armstrong in the 2005 Tour de France, has signed with the Austin-based Discovery Channel Cycling Team.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Houston Chronicle.

Will

Willis, MI

#182 Dec 7, 2006
Why would Landis even THINK about not testifying at his OWN hearing, UNLESS HE FEARED SELF-INCRIMINATION WHILE UNDER OATH! Virtually EVERY athlete testifies at his/her own hearing, so why would TBV even SUGGEST that Landis would not do so as well? What possible questions under oath would Landis be HIDING FROM?
TrustButVerify

Redwood City, CA

#183 Dec 7, 2006
What information can he possibly offer that is relevant to the correctness of the tests, based on first hand knowledge? Nothing.

The correctness of the tests is the only thing at issue. His testimony only costs time and money that are properly spent on experts.

If he were arguing some explanation of how something got there, he would have to testify, but he's not doing that, he's saying there's nothing there. Therefore he has nothing to testify about that it at issue with the case as described in the LDP.

TBV
My Opinion_El Paso_TX

United States

#184 Dec 7, 2006
Hey Will, where in the wild world did you get the notion that Floyd Landis would not be tesifying? The hearing hasn't even begun yet and no one has any idea what will happen there!

Talk about getting onto a tengent. Breath some fresh air Will and take a break here. I think we have all argued this incident into the ground. Now we have to REALLY wait for the hearing to take place.
Will

Willis, MI

#185 Dec 7, 2006
This is the HEIGHT of spin!

Landis' testimony would cost him no ADDITIONAL time. Landis has no "job" to distract him because he was FIRED from Phonak, and Landis seems to have PLENTY of time to POST FREQUENTLY to the Daily Peleton Forum. I'll bet that he'll appear at the hearing, which is likely to be held near Southern California where Landis lives; no great expense involved there. In fact, I'll bet that Landis DOES testify if the case goes to a hearing.

If Landis' position regarding the positive urine sample is that "he's saying there's nothing there", then HE has to say it -- lawyers can't TESTIFY for him.
Will

Willis, MI

#186 Dec 7, 2006
Who woke MOEP up?
nevrflw

Redwood City, CA

#187 Dec 7, 2006
Will wrote:
This is the HEIGHT of spin!
Landis' testimony would cost him no ADDITIONAL time. Landis has no "job" to distract him because he was FIRED from Phonak, and Landis seems to have PLENTY of time to POST FREQUENTLY to the Daily Peleton Forum. I'll bet that he'll appear at the hearing, which is likely to be held near Southern California where Landis lives; no great expense involved there. In fact, I'll bet that Landis DOES testify if the case goes to a hearing.
If Landis' position regarding the positive urine sample is that "he's saying there's nothing there", then HE has to say it -- lawyers can't TESTIFY for him.
Now you really lost it .... will the real Dick Pound please stand up ?
TrustButVerify

Santa Rosa, CA

#188 Dec 7, 2006
It wouldn't cost him any money or time? Shirley, you must be joking.

There's so many days of hearings, with so many people at so much an hour. If his testimony has no bearing on the issues, why would anyone want to waste the time or the money?

I take that back -- I'm sure the ADA side would love to waste his time and money. But they'd still need a reason to call him that had to do with the test, and there is nothing there.

TBV
Will

Willis, MI

#189 Dec 7, 2006
Dick Pound isn't being disciplined for DOPING; how about LANDIS standing up, raising his right hand and testifying UNDER OATH that he never doped at the TdF -- unless of course, Landis for some reason chooses NOT to testify at his OWN hearing! LOL.
ricky rider

AOL

#190 Dec 8, 2006
TrustButVerify wrote:
It wouldn't cost him any money or time? Shirley, you must be joking.
There's so many days of hearings, with so many people at so much an hour. If his testimony has no bearing on the issues, why would anyone want to waste the time or the money?
I take that back -- I'm sure the ADA side would love to waste his time and money. But they'd still need a reason to call him that had to do with the test, and there is nothing there.
TBV
Well, this is another indicator of how little Willie knows about the arbitration process, the law or the facts of the case. Willie is nothing more than a rabid Landis hater who you ought to put on ignore. Then there can be a constructive discussion of the pros and cons of the Landis case. As long as there is a blowhard here to distract you from the real issues surrounding the Landis case, you're going to waste time and energy shadow boxing with a clown.
Will

Woodstock, MD

#191 Dec 8, 2006
Whistling Landistas like to try to DEFINE THE ISSUE, IN ORDER TO DEFINE THE TERMS OF THE DEBATE.

Unfortunately, Landistas CAN'T control the issues surrounding whether Landis doped for the TdF, so they CAN'T limit the inquiry ONLY to those matters where they think they may have a shot of getting Landis "in the clear" of the doping charges.

Landistas cannot PUT BLINDERS on the arbitrators, so as to not have them look at the totality of the relevant circumstances regarding the positive findings of exogenous testosterone in Landis' bodily fluid sample.

Nor can Landistas MUZZLE the debate HERE in this forum (which TalkingpointsBeforeVeracity calls "Toxic" instead of "Topix", and which he considers to be inhabited by "pitbulls" instead of the "lapdogs for Landis" that seek refuge over at his blogsite).

The Lab's test findings are PRESUMED under the rules to be VALID. Landis has the burden of showing that the findings PROBABLY are invalid. IF and ONLY IF Landis succeeds in doing so, THEN the burden shifts back to USADA to prove, TO THE COMFORTABLE SATISFACTION of the arbitrators, that the findings are indeed valid.

USADA can, if need be, make the arbitrators "more comfortably satisfied" that the scientific findings are indeed valid by proving circumstantially THAT LANDIS HAD THE MOTIVE, MEANS AND OPPORTUNITY TO DOPE, AND THAT DOPING WOULD ACCOUNT FOR THE "RIDE OF THE CENTURY" AFTER THE STAGE 16 BONK, WITH THE UNDOCUMENTED, UNDISCLOSED IV INFUSION AS AN INTERVENING OCCURRENCE.
Wayne

Australia

#192 Dec 8, 2006
Will wrote:
LANDIS HAD THE MOTIVE, MEANS AND OPPORTUNITY TO DOPE, AND THAT DOPING WOULD ACCOUNT FOR THE "RIDE OF THE CENTURY" AFTER THE STAGE 16 BONK, WITH THE UNDOCUMENTED, UNDISCLOSED IV INFUSION AS AN INTERVENING OCCURRENCE.
Is there an intermittent caps lock key on your machine?

With respect to " Ride of the Century " I am glad you are so impressed...but what Century are you talking about? This is the 21st...and so far, there hasn't been much in the way of epic rides.

Floyd beat Oscar on S17 by 7:08...and still wasn't in yellow. By contrast, Periero put 29:57 on Landis back in S13. Remember Stage 13??? Remember Periero?????

Most of the candidates for epic TdF rides of the Century are still in the 20th Century...as, for example, when Charly Gaul gained 15 minutes on the leader Gemiani on the last mountain stage of the 1958 Tour. Look it up...or let's hear your favorite epic ride.

---Salem, OR USA---
My Opinion_El Paso_TX

El Paso, TX

#193 Dec 8, 2006
Will, I have always been awake and actually know that my memory is better than yours as you keep proving that here in the forum by your own postings.

"And there's POSITIVE PROOF that the Prohibited Methods provision of UCI's Prohibited List generally bans IV infusions."

Will, you made this statement all on your own and yet, you have not provided any information supporting your statement.

Here is what is written about IV use in UCI's Prohibitive list: "Intervenous infusions are prohibited, except as a legitimate acute medical treatment."

Again Will, you have offered no proof to vaildate your statement here. The statement is misleading at best.

There have been many cases where ateletes have been treated medically by IV Tx. But, I have not seen one case of where an athelete has been subjected to any legal process nor have I seen any case of an athelete having been banned from sports for "IV Tx."

If the IV treatment had been the method ultized in providing the Testosterone into Floyd Landis's biological system, than that would also implicate the Phonack racing team management and their medical doctor/staff. I feel confident that the Swiss Federation may have already addressed this question and issue with the Phonack racing team and their medical staff.

Yes, the arbitrators could assume that the IV treatment was a means of providing the Testosterone. But, I rather doubt that they will take an assumption completely alone as positive proof as they do not have the evidence for proving that assumption.

If they had the leftover IV bag, the surgical tubing and the syringe that was used for this medical treatment, than they could have tested for any residue of Testosterone. But, they do not have that evidence. So Will, you are lacking in your continued argument about the "IV" issue!
Wayne

Australia

#194 Dec 8, 2006
My Opinion_El Paso_TX wrote:
........If the IV treatment had been the method ultized in providing the Testosterone into Floyd Landis's biological system,........
I think that scenario is a bit far-fetched. What would the half-life of the dope have been in order to provide a boost for Stage 17 the following day......yet be completely gone by the end of the Stage?

As I recall, Floyd's Testosterone concentration was a paltry 45.4 ng/mL in the urine sample taken at the end of the Stage....pretty low compared to typical numbers for healthy adult males. Of course, I don't know his medical profile...but wouldn't doping with T show up in suspiciously high T concentration?????

---Salem OR USA---
Jon

Salt Lake City, UT

#195 Dec 8, 2006
Wayne wrote:
<quoted text>
I think that scenario is a bit far-fetched. What would the half-life of the dope have been in order to provide a boost for Stage 17 the following day......yet be completely gone by the end of the Stage?
As I recall, Floyd's Testosterone concentration was a paltry 45.4 ng/mL in the urine sample taken at the end of the Stage....pretty low compared to typical numbers for healthy adult males. Of course, I don't know his medical profile...but wouldn't doping with T show up in suspiciously high T concentration?????
---Salem OR USA---
For the last time, the answer is NO! Half-life with an infusion may be as short as 15+/-1 minutes! East German athletes in past Olympics used to use a stigmasterol nose spray (inhaler), taken one hour before competition. Inhaled stigmasterol results in a rapid rise in testosterone, elimination time (urine) 1-3 hours. Administration of exogenous testosterone suppresses endogenous T and E production. This may explain why "Floyd's testosterone concentration was a paltry 45.4 ng/ml," most of the exogenous T had been eliminated, not all, enough remained to fail Landis on the IRMS, and the T/E ratio. Half-life as an argument will not work Wayne, give it up!
My Opinion_El Paso_TX

El Paso, TX

#196 Dec 8, 2006
"I think that scenario is a bit far-fetched. What would the half-life of the dope have been in order to provide a boost for Stage 17 the following day......yet be completely gone by the end of the Stage?"

And what part of my explanation did you not understand Wayne? I was providing an explanation in reference to evidence in comparison to assumptions in comparison to making charges about the IV medical treatment issue that Will had originated here in the first place.
Jon

Salt Lake City, UT

#197 Dec 8, 2006
One more point, masking agents. An exogenous administration of testosterone also requires an exogenous administration of epitestosterone as a masking agent to keep the T/E ratio as close as possible to 1:1. In Cycling Magazine Landis is quoted as saying that LNDD informed him that the epitestosterone level was so low LNDD could hardly detect it. This statement certainly does not indicate additional exogenous epitestosterone used to mask an increase in testosterone levels. So, in my opinion, Landis was not given epitestosterone as a masking agent!
Wayne

Martinsburg, WV

#198 Dec 8, 2006
Jon wrote:
<quoted text>
For the last time, the answer is NO! Half-life with an infusion may be as short as 15+/-1 minutes! East German athletes in past Olympics used to use a stigmasterol nose spray (inhaler), taken one hour before competition. Inhaled stigmasterol results in a rapid rise in testosterone, elimination time (urine) 1-3 hours. Administration of exogenous testosterone suppresses endogenous T and E production. This may explain why "Floyd's testosterone concentration was a paltry 45.4 ng/ml," most of the exogenous T had been eliminated, not all, enough remained to fail Landis on the IRMS, and the T/E ratio. Half-life as an argument will not work Wayne, give it up!
The argument of Will was that Testosterone was admistered as part of the IV Floyd got the evening after Stage 16. I assume many hours elapsed before the start of S17..........so to do any good, the dope would have to still be working those many hours later.

This doesn't mean Floyd did not use some quick acting dope just before the start....just improbable that Will's IV theory makes sense.

As for whether the measured T concentration at the end of the Stage was reasonable, why not compare that value to Landis' medical profile...or if it exists, values from other Stages???????

---Salem OR USA---
My Opinion_El Paso_TX

El Paso, TX

#199 Dec 8, 2006
Jon and Wayne, I think that we can all agree that the theory of the Testosterone being supplied by the IV medical Tx is non-valid as everyone else who has contributed here have said the same with the exception of Will.

Until the hearing takes place, we're not going to know any more than we think we know at present.
My Opinion_El Paso_TX

El Paso, TX

#200 Dec 8, 2006
"As for whether the measured T concentration at the end of the Stage was reasonable, why not compare that value to Landis' medical profile...or if it exists, values from other Stages???????---Salem OR USA"

Good point Wayne. This has been brought up a few times previously by other writers on this and other forums.
Jon

Salt Lake City, UT

#201 Dec 8, 2006
Wayne wrote:
<quoted text>
The argument of Will was that Testosterone was admistered as part of the IV Floyd got the evening after Stage 16. I assume many hours elapsed before the start of S17..........so to do any good, the dope would have to still be working those many hours later.
This doesn't mean Floyd did not use some quick acting dope just before the start....just improbable that Will's IV theory makes sense.
As for whether the measured T concentration at the end of the Stage was reasonable, why not compare that value to Landis' medical profile...or if it exists, values from other Stages???????
---Salem OR USA---
Well, sadly the answer to your question is this: no baseline values exist to compare the Stage 17 IRMS results to, no baseline IRMS exists for Landis. T/E ratio from other Stages do exist and could possibly be used as a baseline T/E if LNDD would release the documents. I do not know what you mean by a "medical profile" perhaps Landis's doctor has enough data to present to the arbitrators, I don't know that. One other point I would like to make, clearance rates of testosterone metabolites are not constant. Therefore, this may explain why only two metabolites are outside the 3delta unit range instead of all metabolites. The clearance rate argument may work both ways, however, it may prove that Landis did not dope, or it may be the final nail in the coffin. The AAA hearing will have to resolve this issue with expert testimony and may be decisive.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Floyd Landis Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Not Even Lance Deserves This (Dec '13) Jan '17 Phoenix 43
News Greg Lemond demands 'corrupt' cycling czars resign (Oct '12) Aug '16 Bikers 7
News Lance Armstrong's doping drugs (Jan '13) Jan '16 Fart news 189
News Can Armstrong ever be forgiven? (Sep '14) Oct '14 stefanbed53 5
News Opinion: Should we just stop asking about doping? (Jul '13) Apr '14 Carly Jane 2 31
News Lance Armstrong doping documentary contrasts be... (Oct '13) Apr '14 Carly Jane 2 4
Trick or Treat! (Oct '13) Nov '13 My Opinion_El Pas... 5
More from around the web