Floyd Landis – The UCI comes out fighting

How dare you! & Get your facts right buster! Would seem to be the gist

by Tony Farrelly   May 21, 2010  

UCI logo on white

Cycling's governing body, the UCI has hit back at allegations by Floyd Landis that senior UCI figures helped cover up a failed dope test by Lance Armstrong at the 2002 Tour de Suisse.

In a statement the UCI flatly rejects the claim that any of its officials would have acted in such a way pronouncing itself "deeply shocked" at the suggestion. It then fatally holes that aspect of Landis' allegations by pointing out that Armstrong did not compete in the 2002 edition of the race.

Interestingly the UCI posted two responses to Landis on its website you can read the full transcript of both UCI releases below. In the shorter of the two which it is safe to assume was written before they knew that Landis was dragging ex-UCI supremo Hein Verbruggen in to the affair. Translated in to teen-speak the first UCI response amounts to little more than "whatever", there is even what probably passes for a joke amongst high ranking blazer wearers with the assertion that:

"An impartial investigation is a fundamental right, as Mr Landis will understand having contested, for two years, the evidence of his breach of the Anti-Doping Rules in 2006."

For its other statement on the affair however the UCI goes in to full-on shocked maiden aunt mode at the insult to its honour:

"Deeply shocked by the gravity of this statement, which considerably impinges on the honour of all persons who have dedicated themselves to the fight against doping, the UCI wishes to clearly state that it has never changed or concealed a positive test result."

The statement concludes:

"Finally, the UCI wishes to make clear that it will undertake all necessary measures to defend its honour as well as the honour of all its executives who have been unfairly accused by Mr Floyd Landis."

Which very much sounds like they are reaching for their lawyers.

Those UCI statements in full

The International Cycling Union has learned of the declarations made by Mr Floyd Landis and published in the Wall Street Journal.

The UCI regrets that Mr Landis has publicly accused individuals without allowing sufficient time for the relevant US authorities to investigate.

An impartial investigation is a fundamental right, as Mr Landis will understand having contested, for two years, the evidence of his breach of the Anti-Doping Rules in 2006.

The UCI will leave it to the individuals accused by Mr Landis to take the position they see fit with regards to this issue

Longer release

The International Cycling Union (UCI) categorically rejects accusations made by Mr Floyd Landis, in particular the allegation that a positive doping result by Lance Armstrong during the 2002 Tour of Switzerland was concealed after an agreement was reached between the American rider, his directeur sportif Mr Johan Bruyneel and the former UCI President, Mr Hein Verbruggen.

Deeply shocked by the gravity of this statement, which considerably impinges on the honour of all persons who have dedicated themselves to the fight against doping, the UCI wishes to clearly state that it has never changed or concealed a positive test result.

The accusation by Mr Floyd Landis, guilty himself of a breach of the Anti-Doping Rules in 2006, is thus completely unfounded and the UCI can only express its outrage at this new attempt to harm the image of cycling. Our sport has long paid a heavy price for the fraudulent behaviour of individuals such as Floyd Landis and we cannot accept the principles governing our work being challenged in terms of their ethics and honesty by a person who has not hesitated to breach such principles.

By way of information, the UCI would like to point out that Lance Armstrong did not participate in the 2002 Tour of Switzerland.

Finally, the UCI wishes to make clear that it will undertake all necessary measures to defend its honour as well as the honour of all its executives who have been unfairly accused by Mr Floyd Landis.

 

10 user comments

Oldest firstNewest firstBest rated

"By way of information, the UCI would like to point out that Lance Armstrong did not participate in the 2002 Tour of Switzerland."

Maybe the explanation is that the drugs he took have so addled his brain that he can't remember whether these things happened or he imagined them, like he imagined Armstrong doing the 2002 Tour of Switzerland. Or is Armstrong's power so great that he can now rewrite the entry and finishing lists for events and all the attendant media coverage?

Did Nightrider 2013 for Parkinson's UK, doing it again this year just for the fun of it and to raise more money.

jova54's picture

posted by jova54 [586 posts]
21st May 2010 - 13:45

like this
Like (3)

Landis's email says that he was told about the LA/UCI incident in 2002, he actually states that it was the first TOS after the test for EPO came out, so that was Sydney 2000 Olympics, and the first TOS after that was 2001 which LA won.

I think this just McQuaid trying to grasp at straws to discredit Landis.

I believe every word of Landis's statement to be honest.

Complicating matters since 1965

DaSy's picture

posted by DaSy [648 posts]
21st May 2010 - 14:52

like this
Like (1)

Lance Armstrong is the most regularly tested athletes in the world, If he doped all these years do you honestly think there would never have been a positive result announced by now?

Landis has a book out yes?

Bud

posted by BUD [33 posts]
21st May 2010 - 16:22

like this
Like (4)

Funny how many riders that left US Postal\Discovery got caught for doping after they left, ie, Heras, Landis and Hamilton, seems like maybe just a better regime for avoiding detection with US Postal\Discovery.

Add to that the likes of Zabel, Riis and Aldag who all admitted doping but were never detected by any doping controls.

It is naive to think that the drug controls are not able to be subverted.

Complicating matters since 1965

DaSy's picture

posted by DaSy [648 posts]
21st May 2010 - 16:39

like this
Like (4)

But how did Johan Bruyneel do it? He's never had a positive doping test until Li tested positive for clenbuterol last month.

I guess his riders could have used EPO until the test was developed, then switched to storing and transfusing their own blood. But did any of them ever have suspiciously high heamatocrit?

two wheels good; four wheels bad

posted by cat1commuter [1333 posts]
21st May 2010 - 16:48

like this
Like (2)

EPO and blood transfusing go hand in hand. Micro dosing EPO only stays in the blood for a very short time, so the blood is taken when the EPO has raised haemitocrit, then stored.

So taking blood will lower haemitocrit, and riders test okay, then reintroduce the high HT blood when required for specific stages.

Complicating matters since 1965

DaSy's picture

posted by DaSy [648 posts]
21st May 2010 - 20:23

like this
Like (3)

A quote from Prentice Steffen -

..Before going to the start of the Tour, the riders of certain teams, during their training camps, took EPO (which disappears from the urine within three days, even 12 hours when small doses are used) and took their hematocrits up to around 60. Then a doctor withdraws their blood, saving it in special containers, to lower their blood parameters into the accepted range (50) so that they pass without difficulty the medical controls before the Tour. Then, as the teams well know, during the race the vampires (2) can arrive any day but always between 7 and 8 in the morning. After that time, there is no more testing and the riders were able to reinject their own blood. They were racing the stage with an enormous advantage- their hemotrocrit in the 55 to 58 range during the race- then in the evening at the hotel, someone again withdraws their blood so that they sleep without risk (3) and, especially, they escape the possible tests the next morning.

Complicating matters since 1965

DaSy's picture

posted by DaSy [648 posts]
21st May 2010 - 20:32

like this
Like (2)

Assuming @DaSy is right how do the racers avoid the random tests done at all hours that we hear the racers continually tweeting about?
the worm has a book coming out and wants an unthinking audience to fork out once again!
Attached a comment made elsewhere
"HOW can a worm write a book or have it written for him and then after pocketing "Donors money" as well as "Royalties" stand up in the full light of day and shout out
"FOOLS!! TOOK YOU ALL FOR IDIOTS!! NOW HERE IS THE REAL STORY THIS TIME!" PAY ATTENTION THIS IS MY LAST CHANCE!"
ARE any of you listening to this "would be "contrite" if he could be"??
Please folks, there are "bad Apples in any barrel ", but the worm has tried to implicate everyone and says he has no evidence to support his "flights of fancy"!
Motorcycles with fridges are used by tourists, seen them in camping sites, but Pullman Coaches on the side of the road with sponsors as well as racers on board doing WHAT? Are we on Planet flandis, or on planet earth?
Eurosport has an entertaining program "planet armstrong" which i enjoy but i doubt anyone in their "right mind" will broadcast a program with the worm as it's star!
When the book is remaindered someone send me a copy to keep in the "dunny" as i can put it to good use there, as i an an environmentalist in reusing paper!
Those visiting my blog please use "follow" and leave "comments" as the sponsors need to justify their investment in helping "Para Sport"!
Those in the Media use your money supporting "Para Sport" instead of throwing it to low life to support their habit of lying to all

Skippy(advocate for "Disabled / Para Sport")@skippydetour. blogging as skippi-cyclist.blogspot & Parrabuddy.blogspot currently on the road with ProTour Grand Tour Events .

skippy's picture

posted by skippy [378 posts]
22nd May 2010 - 19:05

like this
Like (3)

skippy wrote:
Assuming @DaSy is right how do the racers avoid the random tests done at all hours that we hear the racers continually tweeting about?

that's an interesting question but I don't doubt that they are managing it - look at the number of riders that have come clean about doping for most of their careers. Thats why I believe at least a large part of what Landis has come out with.

TheHatter's picture

posted by TheHatter [810 posts]
23rd May 2010 - 13:51

like this
Like (3)

Ho Ho Ho what a laugh add to it a mixed a twist of surreal python humour with some outlandish Goon concepts thrown in for good measure and you get some idea of where this is going.

If we are to believe that to be this successful at doping and to have riders tested over 2000 times (for the team this number seems realistic if slightly low in my opinion) plus and never test positive, seems to me to be some what unbelievable and very fanciful. How about being as negative and creative as to why these cyclists who make these accusations may have other reasons for making these comments. We are definately in python or goon territory here.

You can suppose or pontificate but there is no evidence. No evidence and many many negative tests = guilt by creative supposition or what if suggestions. We all can dream but to say a team or an individual is guilty because they could get away with it - if they did it this way, with no actual evidence, except through the rantings of one bitter and angry cyclist who can't even get it right as to which race Lance Armstrong rode in then it should be treated with the comtempt that that it deserves.

posted by Ciaran Patrick [117 posts]
20th May 2011 - 20:07

like this
Like (2)