Deliverance

A lot is being written about the “bravery” of all the cyclists who have come clean the past couple of days.  And a few are dismissing this so-called bravery, because in all honesty, most of these guys came clean because they had to.  The Feds had tracked them down and put them on the spot and asked them point blank: “Did they or didn’t they?”  And lying to the Feds meant jail time.  Admission under the threat of punishment is not necessarily a mea culpa in my opinion.  I think most, if not all, would have been just fine taking their secrets to the graves with them, either because of shame for what they’d done or not wanting to risk the loss of a job, or more likely, both.  Who’s to blame them for wanting to keep their secrets?  Don’t each of us have embarrassing secrets we prefer no one ever found out about. 

As cycling fans, we have this odd relationship with those we watch and cheer on.  We don’t know these people.  We cannot understand what motivates them.  Yet we heap expectations on them and request acts of heroic proportions.  And then we put them on pedestals.  When we find out that they cheated to achieve such amazing feats we are left with three choices.  #1) Forgive and forget, #2) Not forgive, and not forget, and #3) Walk away from the whole stinking mess.  How do I rationalize forgiving Christian VandeVelde, for example while mentally persecuting Lance Armstrong (which, I admit, is exactly what I’ve done.)  I’ve met Christian several times – even ridden with him – and he seems like a super nice guy.  I listened to Armstrong speak once in Rolla, MO back when I was the biggest LA fanboy I knew, and I came away from his talk thinking he was an arrogant prick after he made some insult about the size of Rolla and refused to let a woman with cancer come up and hug him on stage during the Q and A.  But I was too scared to say how I felt because everyone else loved him.  But do I know either of these guys?  Absolutely not.  How do I make sense of the categorization my brain does automatically and without conscience thought: Christian is a good guy, Lance is a shit.  Partly because I could honestly care less at this point if they doped or not.  It’s more about how they have dealt with their decision and the fact that it now has become public knowledge.  Part of what defines character is how you respond to adversity.

Speaking of which, several years ago, I got to spend the day with Floyd Landis.  I was put in charge of organizing a benefit to raise money for osteoarthritis research, and was charged with coming up with a keynote speaker.  Floyd had been found guilty of doping, had served his 2 year sentence and was then making his comeback racing for Ouch/Maxxis on an artificial hip.  This was before he would make his full confession in the Wall Street Journal article.  At the time, I believed he was innocent of the doping charges.  I contacted Team Ouch and three phone calls later had somehow managed to secure him as the speaker for the event through his agent.  They never asked, but I guaranteed there would be no talking about doping, him winning, or not winning the Tour de France, or Lance Armstrong.  We just wanted to hear about what it was like to be a professional bike racer who performed with an artificial hip.  We made the public announcement that he was coming to speak at the event and I immediately got a couple of derogatory emails about the appropriateness of hiring a ‘doper’ as a speaker.  I stood my ground, defended Floyd, and the event remained scheduled as planned.

The day of the benefit, I had to pick him up at his hotel and take him to lunch.  There would be four of us going – and we were to eat at the winery in Rocheport – a 30 minute drive away.  When I met him and his agent in the hotel lobby, I was nervous.  He rounded the corner suddenly and came right up to me and said, “Hey, I’m Floyd” and shook my hand really, really strongly with a huge smile on his face, and I relaxed almost immediately.  I asked him if he and his agent would like to ride separately in their larger rented car, following us out to Rocheport, since it was a long drive, and I only had my Subaru Outback.  He said “Hell no – I can fit in the back seat – let’s go.” So I drove to Rocheport with Floyd Landis in the back seat of my Subaru.  Somewhere along I-70 I came to the realization that this was one of the most surreal experiences of my life.  Here was the man I watched ride solo and win Stage 17 of the 2006 Tour de France in what many have called one of the single greatest days of bicycle racing ever, sitting in my back seat.  The word ‘bizarre’ doesn’t come close to describing how I felt.  We got to the winery and Floyd asked if I rode.  I laughed it off, but he asked again and I confessed I was just a Cat 5 choade.  He asked me more about where I had ridden – out west?  Overseas?  I told him I had done both – ridden the Copper Triangle in Colorado and gotten to meet Davis Phinney through a mutual friend.  He asked how Davis was – if I had been able to notice any evidence of the Parkinson’s he is affected by.  He complemented him on being a truly amazing cyclist and a great guy.  I told him about how on the descent of Fremont Pass, the freewheel hub of my Mavic Ksyrium Elite had started squealing like an ape being raped  and he laughed and told me he had the same thing happen to him once.  I asked about his hip, how he was doing – and he told me the entire story.  Despite what I knew about Johan Bruyneel and Lance Armstrong largely ignoring his condition and not facilitating him receiving the appropriate medical attention to have it addressed when he rode for Postal, he remained respectful of them when speaking about them – although he did recount a story of Johan demanding he fly to Europe the day after he had two screws painfully removed from his femur which resulted in a massive hematoma that extended down his leg, which he would later have to hide from doctors to be allowed to race. 

As I drove him back to his hotel after lunch, I asked how his parents were, especially in dealing with the press and aftermath of the 2006 Tour.  He said they were doing just fine, and thanks so much for asking.  I asked what his Dad did for a living, and he told me about his trucking company.  Amongst other things, he moves gravel in large dump trucks, and generally loves his job.  There was a long pause after this, and he continued “You know – sometimes I think that may be the most basic, and most gratifying job a person could have.  Move this stuff here, to that place over there. Work hard at it, then go home and enjoy the evening with your family.”  I liked Floyd.

The benefit that night went incredibly well.  Floyd seemed nervous at first during his talk, but warmed into it, and there was a great Q and A afterward with him.  He signed things for people, spent a tremendous amount of time interacting with folks and posing for pictures.  Basically he gave himself to all the people that were in attendance.  I was grateful and relieved that the whole thing had come off so well.  As I walked him and his agent back out to their car, he shook my hand firmly again and told me to give him a ring if I was out in San Diego; that we’d go for a ride.

The next year, he would confess to doping throughout his career, and to having done so under the direction of Johan and Armstrong on Postal, and then on his own with Phonak.  He was called a “rat” and a “liar” by cycling fans and ostracized from the sport by commentators, fans, other cyclists.  He had previously accepted money for his legal defense knowing he was guilty all the time – and people were upset with that.  But in my estimation, they were more upset that he was now calling Lance Armstrong a cheat.  Lance defended himself by saying Floyd was mentally unstable.  (In retrospect, I’m thinking you’d have to be somewhat mentally unstable to race at that level at that time.)  But from my day with Floyd, my impression was that he was as down-to-earth and genuine as a person could be. 

In the midst of Floyd being singled out by virtually everyone, none of his former teammates that also doped came to his defense.  Hamilton, Vaughters, Zabriskie, Hincapie, VandeVelde….they could have spoken up and said, “Hang on – he’s telling the truth.”  But they didn’t.  There was positive incentive, to be sure: defending a friend, telling the truth.  But they would also be certain to lose 2 years of their career and undergo the same smear campaign from the Armstrong camp (see Hamilton, Andreus, O’Reilly, Anderson, LeMond etc) – and maybe they would never be able to race again at the level they wanted to, like Floyd.  They circled the wagons, remained silent and protected themselves, and Armstrong indirectly. Now each has admitted to doping – under the threat of jail time.  Floyd was right all along.  As was Hamilton.  As was LeMond and the Andreus.  It has kind of played out like a movie.  On the topic of movies, Dave Zabriskie was recently quoted as saying that the movie “Breaking Away” inspired him to become a cyclist, and that’s what good movies do, “They inspire.  Make us believe we can do things and believe things.”

I also think a good movie makes you ask yourself “what would I do?”  Like every time I watch the movie Deliverance, I ask myself, ‘Would I bury that body deep and paddle on?’  Or ‘Would I go to the police and say it was self-defense?’ And every single time, I think to myself, I’m burying that body deep and paddling my ass down the river pronto.  In the movie version of the cycling saga that has played out for us all to watch, I play the same game.  I’d like to think I wouldn’t have doped – but I probably would have (remember - bury that body deep and tell no one).  But I also like to think I would have confessed for the purpose of standing up for a friend instead of just to save my own skin.  But who knows?

I’d still like to take Floyd up on that bike ride. 

I still think Christian is a good guy. 

And I still think Lance is a shit.

Grey Manrod Associates

When we last left the Landis saga, the UCI was threatening to sue Floyd because he had insulted "the honour" of current President Pat McQuaid and past-President Hein Verbruggen in an interview given to a German television show and summarized in the following statement sent to Floyd on Feb 7th.

"For the record, you basically indicate that the UCI and its current and former leaders may protect certain cyclists suspected of doping and not others, may falsify results and create stars, and that they may be corrupt."

Days later, Mr. McQuaid was then interviewed by Cycling Weekly, portions of which appeared in this article dated February 10, 2011.

"A lot of the stuff he [Landis] says in relation to what went on in those years is probably true," admitted McQuaid....."There was a lot of doping going on in those teams in those years....If it [American Supreme Court decision] proves that the US Postal Team were involved in a lot of doping, it wouldn't necessarily surprise me.  In those days it was possible to beat the system."

Last week, however, past-president Hein Verbruggen was back on the warpath as he emerged from the shadows to criticize the cycling media for focusing too much on doping in the sport, which he states only affects "one or two percent of the sport", yet receives "50% of the coverage."  Maybe we should cut the old-timer some slack and chalk this statement up to short-term memory loss.  But to refresh his memory, let's look at the VeloNews article published on the 16th of this month (the day Armstrong retired for a second time) which showed the list of the top 20 of the 2005 Tour de France - both in terms of placing and doping.

1. Lance Armstrong, Discovery Channel

2. Ivan Basso, CSC – confessed to Puerto involvement and banned from 2006 Tour ()
3. Jan Ullrich, T-Mobile – connected to Puerto and banned from 2006 Tour
4. Francisco Mancebo, Illes Balears – connected to Puerto and banned from 2006 Tour
5. Alexander Vinokourov, Astana – tested positive for doping at 2007 Tour
6. Levi Leipheimer, Gerolsteiner — accused of doping by Floyd Landis and former Gerolsteiner manager
7. Michael Rasmussen, Rabobank – ejected from 2007 Tour while in the yellow jersey
8. Cadel Evans, Davitamon-Lotto
9. Floyd Landis, Phonak – disqualified as 2006 Tour winner for doping
10. Oscar Pereiro, Phonak – alleged to have doped by Landis
11. Christophe Moreau, Credit Agricole – admitted EPO use after Festina Affaire
12. Yaroslav Popovych, Discovery Channel – home searched
13. Eddy Mazzoleni, Lampre-Caffita – charged in doping conspiracy after receiving a two-year ban in 2008
14. George Hincapie, Discovery Channel — accused of doping by Floyd Landis
15. Haimar Zubeldia, Euskaltel-Euskadi
16. Jörg Jaksche, Liberty Seguros – admitted doping since 1997
17. Bobby Julich, CSC
18. Oscar Sevilla, T-Mobile – suspended by team in 2006 for Puerto links
19. Giuseppe Guerini, T-Mobile
20. Carlos Sastre, CSC
Also, 23. Leonardo Piepoli, Saunier Duval-Prodir – tested positive for CERA in 2008

2005 was the year that Lance stood on the podium and said to those who doubted the performance of the upper echilon of Tour cyclists, "I feel sorry for you.  I'm sorry you don't believe in miracles."

Even if you exclude everyone on this list that was merely accused or suspected of doping by Floyd, that still leaves 50% of the cyclists finishing in the top 20 guilty of doping.  Hein, if you are reading, even a miracle can't make 50% be less than 1%.

---

How has Floyd responded to all of this seeming hypocrisy?  Enter Mr. Chade O. Grey and Mr. Sigmund Manrod, attorneys at law for a firm entitled Grey Manrod, Associates. 

Under the noms des plume of Grey & Manrod, Floyd has sent a long list of emails to the UCI that are yes, hilarious, but also ask some incredibly good questions.  You can read all the emails at the NYVelocity site: here.

My favorite of which, however, is this one, penned by Mr. Sigmund Manrod to Mr. Ditesheim, the UCI attorney on Feb. 20th.

---

Mr. Ditesheim, the previous letter sent by you, dated 07 Feb 2011 requires a retraction by Mr. Landis. It sets a 15-day window for such a retraction to be submitted. Given the points listed above which detail the fundamental concession that Mr. Landis' statements are "probably true", the established fact that Mr. McQuaid and Mr. Verbruggen are public figures, and that Article 17 of the United Nations International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights requires the predicate of "unlawful attack" to be the basis for legal recourse, we feel that Mr. Landis has acted in a "lawful" manner at all times since he has disclosed his previous behaviours, has told the truth (as accepted by Mr. McQuaid). We consider the threat of any further legal action against him by your clients to be baseless and frivolous, serving the sole purpose of chilling his voice as it relates to his truthful comments to the media, and further exposure of truths about many facets of professional cycling during this period.

It is public knowledge that Mr. Landis has cooperated with the US Food and Drug Administration in providing his eye-witness accounts and conveyed his truthful knowledge of doping during his cycling career. For your information, providing false statements to the US Food and Drug Administration in the course of an investigation carries with it severe penalties. Mr. Landis maintains that he proffered his truthful recollections to the authorities. Mr. Landis understand his responsibility to tell the truth in this matter, and given the radical and direct contradiction of previously made statements by Mr. McQuaid, it is encouraging to see that they, too, understand the import of coming to terms with the truth in the matter.

Please feel free to answer [these] questions.

Primary question: As now Mr. McQuaid has conceded that the "stuff" that Mr. Landis has conveyed is "probably true", are we to still follow Mr. McQuaid's seemingly flippant mention that things he says in the past will be stood by today, despite this being a direct contradiction?In the absence of your direct answers and given the consideration of Mr. McQuaid’s current concession that Mr. Landis' statements are "probably true", we will consider this to be closure to this matter.

Secondary question: If Mr. McQuaid is now allowing for changes to his position and public statement, can you please indicate which part of his "honour" still remains damaged?

Tertiary question: If there still remains some damage, what form is this damage? Please provide documentation as to this damage.

Finest regards,

Sigmund A. Manrod

---

Say what you will about past transgressions, Landis brings up some pretty serious contradictions in the UCI's behavior, both formerly and presently.  If these questions and allegations were raised by a reporter for the NY Times, or Wall Street Journal, I think they would be taken a lot more seriously and obviously reach a wider audience.  But what will the cycling community do with them coming from fictitious (and hilarious) attorneys at law, Grey & Manrod?  The questions are the same and just as relevant regardless who is asking them, even if he is wearing double-middle-finger shades.

Oh yeah, and while all of this is going on, Contador is still racing, despite the WADA rule that ANY clenbuterol found in your system is enough to have you serving a suspension.  When asked about the long delay and current status of Contador's case, McQuaid said he is just following protocol.  But I'm wondering, as are others, what happened to proper protocol for other cyclists like Li Fuyu and Tom Zirbel  whose positive A-sample results were announced before B-samples were even tested.  Both of them are still sitting out, and appropriately so.  Where is the equality amongst cyclists that the UCI is so proud of?  It will be interesting to see what Grey Manrod has to say about all of the upcoming developments....

Translation: "Danger! (out of work)" Further translation: "I've got lots of time on my hands, bitches."

Now, I realize that with all these different names of people and places and entities, this entire saga is getting pretty hard to follow.  So if you are having difficulties keeping track of who's who in this whole mess, I've put together a schematic for you using real pictures of all the places and people involved where I can.  There were a few individuals and locations that I couldn't find pictures of - so I just filled them in with substitutes.  I hope this helps make future discussion of this ongoing story a lot easier.  Click to enlarge.

Defending your honour, losing your credibility

Does anyone know if the Floyd Fairness Fund is still accepting donations?  I'd like to send some money. 

Here's the letter Mr. Landis received last week from the UCI.

Uh-oh.  Pat and Hein-y have had their "honour" offended because Floyd accused the UCI of "protecting certain cyclists."

Fast forward to Feb 12.  UCI press officer Enrico Carpani says that they (the UCI) are "pleased" with the  Spanish Federation's Contador investigation and further notes, "It is not beneficial to cycling to see Contador crucified."  You remember the Spanish Federation - right?  They are the ones that just cleared Contador of doping charges despite the fact that he failed two tests for Clenbuterol in his system.  It's so nice to see the UCI protecting wishing the best for Contador.

Pat McQuaid giving the "award of obscene hand-gestures" to Bertie in recognition of his now copy-protected fingerbang salute.

Floyd has written the UCI's attorney, Rolf Ditesheim (the man in charge of preserving Pat and Hein-y's "honour") two responses:

Response #1:

Hello Mr Ditesheim'

I haven't heard from you in a few days and thought I'd drop you a note with a few things to ponder. I'd like you to please try to reconcile this (http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/carpani-says-uci-pleased-with-spanish-federations-handling-of-contador-case) with your threat of litigation in light of todays exoneration of Alberto Contador. I look forward to your explanation.

Thank You
Floyd Landis

And Response #2:

Dear Mr Ditzensheim,
I hope something has not happened to you (!) I have been looking forward to getting to know you good. I have copied Mr. Verbeast at the UCI because a year ago he sent me a similar email asking for some kind of retraction. I don't know what you want retractioned though(!!!).

And I am not living in Switzerland now though and maybe you have a colleague that you trust (and with his records!!!) that can represent me in my upcoming trial. If he can represent me for 500 Swiss Franks that would be GREAT (!!) because I am broke. (that would be 250 swiss franks up front!!!).

One other thing is I want to request that the trial be in Zurich in the summer because it is beautiful there but cold. If Zurich doesn't work possibly San Diego(?????). I live here!!

Thank You!
Floyd

This is a serious matter

(If you are wondering about all the odd (!!!s) and odder word choices in Floyd's response, I believe he's mocking Hein-y's writing style noted in a number of emails he sent to Floyd accusing him of being capable only of winning a yellow jersey in being a nuisance.)

---

At this point, I wish to stop and ask some questions to all those who have, like me, decided to waste far too much time following this saga.

1) Regarding "honour": Who actually sues somebody in order to protect their "honour" these days?  It's like some warped anachronistic medieval sentiment has suddenly sprung up in the midst of the soap opera - only instead of Pat and Hein-y challenging Floyd to a duel themselves, they've sent their briefcase-laden attorney/knight to fight in their stead.  I wonder if the letter also came with a virtual glove-slap across the face?

2) Regarding Contador:  Why isn't anyone testing the boy's hair?  Remember that it was the dark hair of 2008 Olympic silver medalist Dimitrij Ovtcharov which yielded a clean sample and thus provided the evidence that his positive Clenbuterol urine sample was likely from accidental ingestion.  If you didn't knowingly take Clenbuterol and recognized that your hair sample could exonerate you - wouldn't you willingly shave your entire head with the excitement of retaining your jersey and not being banned? (Ok - maybe not your entire head if you're Contador because he's got some scars up there - but at least one measely pointy sideburn. Shit, this investigation has gone on so long - Bertie could have grown an entire moustache and shaved it off to donate to the lab in his defense)

3) Regarding Contador #2:  What about the plasticizers found in Bertie's blood as reported by the NY Times in October?  The same plastic that is used to make transfusion bags was found in his blood at a level of 8 times over the limit during the 2010 Tour de France.

The UCI has now said that they will discuss the Spanish Federation's report with WADA and make a decision if they will appeal it or not - but what else could they say, especially considering the media's general sentiment on the issue of Bertie being cleared a farce.  As a spectator for the 2011 pro season, I think I'm going to be tuning my inner-cynic extra finely, unfortunately.  Cause this whole business is reading pretty damned high on the COMO CYCO Stink-O-Meter:

And if we didn't have Floyd publicly dropping trou' and pressing ham on the windshield of the UCI bus, who else would have the cajones to do it?  In some strange way, as a man with absolutely nothing else to lose, I think Floyd could be the person who could save professional cycling.

Too much snow for the mailman to come - so I'm off on a rant....

Earlier in the week, many read the Floyd Landis interview with Paul Kimmage.  Among many, many other things said during the course of the interview, Landis had some pretty pointed accusations about the UCI and its directors, past and present.  In a nut shell, there were certain suggestions that the UCI has been playing favorites within the pro-peloton for money. Two days ago, current UCI president Pat McQuaid had this to say about the interview:

"I read some it.  It got boring half-way through.  I'll read the rest on a plane some time.  I got about a third of the way in.  It was just boring, the detail he was going into about Landis his background and his philosophy about life."

"I can see about this far in front of my face....past that, nothing interests me."

I've never been the director of anything in my life, but I have a suggestion for Mr. McQuaid.  Pat, even if you think Landis is lying through his teeth about everything now, and you would no more wipe your ass with the transcript of the conversation than actually read it - fair enough.  I still see two more reasonable ways to respond to the question posed to you regarding your thoughts on it.

a) "I did read it.....with great interest as a matter of fact.  Some of the suggestions are pretty serious there and are worth looking into. I have no evidence of corruption in the UCI, but cleaning up the sport means making sure it's clean from both the bottom and the top."

b) "No, I've not read it completely yet, but I'm planning on it when I get a little time.  Regardless of Mr. Landis' history, we should take his present comments seriously.  If cleaning up the sport means we occasionally end up chasing some wild geese - so be it.  It's worth the effort."

Either way, you diffuse the seriousness of the allegations.  And you don't end up sounding like a defensive ass-hat.  Jesus, is it so difficult to not sound like a complete effing moron?  Well if you are Pat McQuaid, apparently it is rather difficult.  And the stupidity doesn't stop there....He and the UCI recently suffered a tongue-lashing by respected cycling writer Joe Lindsey in the Boulder Report regarding their refusal to listen to the very pros they are supposed to be protecting, pissing off promoters (and the president of Tour of California, Andrew Messick) and finally ticking off bike manufacturers.  The general question posed by Lindsey is, "Is the UCI losing the sport?"  Well, even if Pat has lost his common sense and the sport of cycling, he hasn't lost his ability to mack on the ladies.

(That's Mari Holden on the left, 2000 world time trial champion, and also first American woman to win three consecutive U.S. time trial championsihps (1998,1999,2000)  Watch the hands, Pat).

And speaking of the UCI and the Tour of California, does anyone else find it a little odd that in 2008, Amgen Tour of California organizer AEG stood steadfastly by the UCI rule that prohibited cyclists under doping investigations from competing (thus preventing then Rock Racing cyclists Tyler Hamilton, Oscar Sevilla and Santiago Botero from racing) but now in 2011, AEG and UCI have agreed to drop that rule for the Tour of California, when a certain Mr. Armstrong (also under investigation) may be wishing to compete? 

I'm guessing the draw in attendance (and thus revenue) in response to the appearnces of Hamilton, Sevilla and Botero far surpasses that of Armstrong - so there is no monetary incentive behind this decision - right?  Such suggestions would be downright....well "boring" for lack of a better word.

And back to Floyd. I guess, according to Pat, everything he had to say was completely bogus.  Oh wait - except now some of it is being substantiated in hard-copy form.....like Landis' reported dispute with the UCI and the money the UCI owed him when his own team (Mercury) couldn't pay him his salary in 2001. (The UCI has regulations that provide financial support to professional cyclists in the event that their team cannot.)  Apparently, the UCI didn't only withold paying Floyd - but also his teammate Chris Horner who had to "have a garage sale to pay his monthly bills and feed his children....."  You can read all those documents, released today, on the Cyclocosm website.  Past UCI president Hein Verbruggen believed that Landis and Horner's attorney, Michael Rutherford, was too aggressive in his attempt to make the UCI follow their own rules in trying to gain payment for his clients which was not justified by the small amount of the claim:

"Your aggressiveness is not at all justified by a claim of $6,666.66....I have given order to our legal department to take the tone of your approach into account when it comes to following up on your request."

(click to enlargen, or read here).

But the UCI is above reproach - right Pat?  I wonder if the UCI ever treated LA like this?  That old "Floyd has zero credibility" thing that his detractors keep spouting is certainly losing some steam.

Snow Day: Time for a good read...and to possibly eat the family dog.

For those of you who read this blog from somewhere other than Missouri, you may not be aware that we are currently under a "blizzard warning" right now.  Thus, this morning finds the GEEC, the COMOCYCO dog and I sitting in COMO CYCO headquarters, hunkered down and trying to survive "Snowpocolypse 2011."  The GEEC informed me that yesterday while at Schnuck's grocery store, she witnessed an older man and wife pushing a grocery cart that contained, among many, many other things, 6 gallons of milk.  Six.  In mid-aisle, the man suddenly turned to the woman and commanded her to return to the "cookies and cracker" aisle to pick up an extra couple of packages of Double-Stuff Oreos.  Clearly, they took this meteorological event more seriously than we did, because the GEEC only managed to secure us a single package of Chip's Ahoy.  We're so screwed.

Of course, hearing that others' food stores are so well-endowed has made me a little nervous this morning.  Therefore the GEEC and I gathered up all of our existing food in the middle of the living room floor and came up with plan for how it will be rationed out.  Next, we came up with a plan of what we will do once the provisions are gone.  Right now - it's not looking so good for the COMO dog, who we agree will probably have to be eaten first.  This will be followed by the GEEC's left foot - which is her bum foot anyway - thus may provide us with some sustenance until the rescue party can come dig us out, God willing.  I'm a little worried though, because despite eating a massive bowl of oatmeal this morning, the mere suggestion of forthcoming starvation is making the COMO CYCO dog sort of resemble this to me, now.

In an attempt to stave off hunger, the GEEC and I are trying to stay busy.  She is chopping up the patio furniture for us to burn and I'm catching up on some reading.

More specifically, I'm reading an interview that Paul Kimmage did with Floyd Landis around Thanksgiving.  Now, you may be completely burned out on the entire saga - and justifiably so.  Especially if you bought his book, or donated money to his "Fairness Fund."  But if you have the interest (and the time....the full interview lasted 7 hours) you might want to check this out.  It's quite an interesting read in my opinion.  You can read excerpts at cyclingnews here, or read the entire thing here. What interests me is that it is not an "anti-Lance" interview....but rather a "what happened" story....

After reading it, I'm struck by his honesty and his lack of pretension.  This interview should have been the autobiographical book he wrote rather than "Positively False."And I'm left thinking that Landis may be done with cycling, but cycling may not be done with him.

I'm curious to know what others think about this article....

A turd by any other name....

Wow - kind of a busy 24 hours....

First off, as announced yesterday, Floyd Landis is done with cycling.  Before announcing this to the press, however, he conferred with any man's closest and most reliable ally:


And 24 hours later, the Sports Illustrated article on Lance Armstrong drops.  You can read it here, if you haven't already done so.  I've been discussing it with a close friend who asked me, "Are you surprised?"  To which I replied, "Surprised, no.  Interested?  Very."  The man is fascinating.  If everything implied is true, think of what it takes to successfully hide, suppress or sugarcoat all of this evidence for that many years.  It's amazing really that he ever believed himself that he could get away with it.  But it was only made possible because of those of us who wanted to believe it all.

It's like someone just fed me a big turd and said, "Check it out - brownies." 
I reply, "Hang on, I think this may actually be poop." 
He responds, "I have never pooped in my life."
I ask, "Never?"
He answers "Ever - Plus, look how much good I've done for the world outside of cooking brownies! How could I be capable of doing anything so underhanded?" 
To which I reply, "I love how chocolaty they taste."
He reponds, "Want to buy a T-shirt with a picture of a brownie on it?"
I reply, "I'll take two."

Oh, yes you can...

Anyway - the unfortunate business is that the media attention surrounding LA detracts from the Tour Down Under.  It's actually been a little difficult to catch footage of the race, and not without having to endure some pain.  Case in point: Last night I was looking online at the Versus Channel for some highlights from Stage 1 of the Tour when a commerical for the Canadian Grand Prix Cycliste came on (which won't even occur until September!). I began to patiently sit through the obligatory advertisement, half tuning it out, while I waited for the Tour highlights to start. The ad features two generic cyclists, devoid of any team affiliation, one in green and one in blue.

Everything is going along swimmingly in the highly stylized commercial and I actually turned the volume of my speakers up in anticipation of needing to amplify Phil Ligget's hushed commentary of the forthcoming replayed action of Stage 1 when all of a sudden, at the 15 second mark of the video,  'generic green cyclist dude' inexplicably opens his mouth in a grimace and begins to scream at 'generic blue cyclist dude' like he has suddenly morphed into a bike riding velociraptor with a hot poker in his ass.

Getting the scream warmed up...

And the delivery....

Watch for yourself....remember to gird your loins at 15 seconds.




Seriously - what the fuck just happened?

As you can see, this allows 'generic green cyclist dude' to take 'generic blue cyclist dude' at the line, which, quite honestly, is a given.  'Generic green cyclist dude' ought to be thanking his lucky stars he didn't get splashed with the liquid feces he undoubtedly just forced from 'generic blue cyclist dude' by pulling a stunt like that.  No matter, I'm sure 'generic blue cycling dude' would be able to easily convince everyone he actually just shit a chocolate shake by winning the next race and throwing some money around....because, seriously - how cool would that be?  I'd even line up to buy one.

Biting, Boobs and "The Beazed"

I read with great interest in cyclingnews this morning that Fabian Cancellara was finally awarded his 2008 Silver Olympic medal at a special ceremony recently.  If you remember, Fabian originally won the Bronze in the 2008 Olympic road race and Davide Rebellin took Silver.  But that was before Rebellin tested positive for EPO/CERA and had to give his medal back.  Cancellara was reportedly most happy because the medal he was given was the exact same one that was taken away from Rebellin.

"It’s the original medal that was given to Rebellin. It has some marks on it so I can tell it was his."

Although the article doesn't specify, I'm guessing that upon closer inspection, the marks left in Rebellin's medal were actually teeth marks from him striking the ever popular "biting the medal" pose after the ceremony.

(A picture of not David Rebellin not actually biting the medal)

And much like the teeth marks left on a pencil found in the glove compartment of Jon Voight's car in Seinfeld, so too could these marks be matched back to Rebellin's dental arcade to validate the origin of the medal should Cancellara ever want to pawn it.  That said, one cannot discount the fact that the teeth marks may not have been made by Rebellin himself, but rather are those of an adoring fan.  Of course, I'm not sure how cycling compares to other sports in spectator popularity in Italy. But here in the states, fans are apparently willing to bite the medals right off American Olympic snowboarders, for example - even the lowly Bronze medal.  Case in point: Proud U.S. Olympic snowboarder Scotty Lago wearing his Bronze medal in his groinal region and having it nibbled upon thusly:

(DO NOT try this at home.  Scotty Lago is a trained professional and has years of experience teabagging women with dangling metal objects.  Further, the woman in the photo is wearing a mouthguard to prevent tooth chipping and is also believed to be very stupid.)

In other news, Mark "The Manx Missile" Cavendouche has found himself a lady friend, according to the UK paper The Sun.

And low and behold, it is The Sun's own "Page 3" girl, Peta Todd.  England, like many other developing nations, realized some time ago that conventional newspapers are a dying form of communication.  Increasing numbers of people are choosing to read news online at work instead of actually working at work, or reading the news in the paper when they get home at night.  Of course newsprint still has a certain demand in society and the day when fishermen start wrapping their haddock in laptops will truly mark the time of a bygone era.  But wrapping fish isn't the only thing that printed paper does better than computers, and the Brits are out to maintain demand for their daily rag by serving up a little softcore in the daily newsprint.  That brings me back to Peta Todd, Cavs new "lady friend".  The Sun's "Page 3" is essentially devoted to topless women.  And it is on Page 3 where more pictures of Peta, (and conveniently pictures of more Peta ) can be found:

(A photo of Ms. Todd, rendered SFW with two strategically placed crying Cavendouches.  You see - if the COMO CYCO was printed on paper and delivered to your home, you could see an uncensored version of the photo in the privacy of your house during dinner....and then wrap your fish up in it.)

And lastly, you've probably heard by now that Floyd Landis recently played an instrumental part in the federal investigation of Michael Ball's Rock Racing by wearing a wiretap during meetings he had with Ball which reportedly revealed a plethora of doping products.  But what you may NOT have heard is that Floyd's one-man crusade to clean up the sport not only includes participation in the fed's investigation, but also training EPO-sniffing dogs which he's teaching to attack on command....


Here we can see him training his dog named "The Beazed" to attack a green ring of some sort.  Of course, dogs see color differently, so to The Beazed, a green ring actually looks something like this:

(By the way, if you find one of these on e-bay with some teethmarks on it, make sure to snag it.  It could be worth a lot more.)

Plausibility: One man's bribe is another man's gift

First things first today....congratulations are in order for all those that competed in the State Road Race  in Ste. Genevieve this past weekend.  With the heat and humidity that descended upon Missouri, this race must have been miserable.  Here's how some of our local kids did:

Men's Pro 1,2:

Dave Henderson - 6th place out of 31 that started.

Women's 1/2/3:

Pam Hinton - 2nd place

Men's 4/5:

Colin Mayhan - 5th place out of 65 that started.

Juniors 10-14:

Judah Bennett - 2nd place

Micah Bennett - 3rd place

Juniors 15-18:

Gideon Benett - 1st place

Jack Kohler - 3rd place

Next up...The Pedaler's Jamboree is this Saturday and Sunday.  If you've not yet registered, do not despair!  You can register onsite Saturday morning for $35.

---

Onto other things now.  In my continuing battle with Mediacom, I have refused to subscribe to the Versus channel (which I used to get for free before it was unceremoniously yanked from my channel line-up conveniently prior to Paris-Roubaix) and thus ended up watching the conclusion of the Tour of California online on my laptop over the weekend.  During which, I was surprised to hear that Floyd Landis actually made an appearance at the Tour on Saturday to visit the OUCH VIP tent.  According to one story, he faced some hecklers who shouted "Floyd you suck!" in obvious repsonse to his allegations that Lance Armstrong and others doped and may have blackmailed the anti-doping authorities.  Interestingly, in today's cycling news, UCI (Union Cycliste Internationale) President Pat McQuaid acknowledged that the organization did, in fact, accept a $100,000 "donation" from Lance Armstrong in 2002 and further commented that accepting such a donation (the first and only such donation a rider has ever made to the organization) was regrettable since Armstrong was still racing at the time the "donation" was made.  Ever heard of something called "conflict of interest?"

Of course, shortly before Landis was accused of being mentally unstable by Johan Bruyneel and Lance Armstrong, he claimed that the two had bribed the UCI to cover up a positive EPO test.  McQuaid responded to this claim during ths same press conference in which he acknolwedged that the acceptance of the "donation" was unwise:

"There is no way that the UCI or it's former president...could have accepted a bribe.  It's just not possible."

"Just not possible?"...hmmmmm.....Let's create a scale of plausibility.  A 10 on the scale would be represented by things truly not possible, say like me learning how to breathe through my anus.  And a 1 on the scale would be represented by things potentially very possible, no matter how undesirable they may be, say like Sarah Palin remaining politically active. 

Based on this, I'd have to say that the $100,000 the UCI deposited from Mr. Armstrong being bribe-like equals the plausibility and distastefullness of Sarah not going away anytime soon.....yeah...this shit is happening.....

Heroes

Ok - so what so we do NOW?

I don't know how I feel about the steaming pile that was laid upon the world of cycling news this morning.  I almost entitled yesterday's post, "A Great Day for American Cycling" with the recent exciting victories of Farrar and Zabriskie....but with the implications Landis has made regarding many American cyclists still racing today (literally) like Armstrong, Hincapie, Leipheimer, Zabriskie and Barry, American cycling may only be as great as what....European cycling?  I mean - no one was that shocked when Vino or Basso were implicated.  Why did we (meaning I) think we (meaning Americans) were above this?  Maybe we (meaning I) didn't really think we were, but rather just really hoped it.  Too much. 

I can't help it.  I've always routed for sports figures.  Athletics has always been too important a part of my life not to get emotionally charged by someone competing.  Back in the day, it was this guy.

He was my hero when I was a kid.  He may have also been the last "clean" athlete I ever rooted for, whatever "clean" really means.  And even as "clean" as Dr. J was, he still tried to choke the shit out of Larry Bird once.

Another famous basketball player named Charles Barkley probably put it best when he was reprimanded for spitting on a fan who was shouting obscenities at him and responded by proclaiming, "I am not a role model."  But it's fans like me who elevate athletes to this status...by watching them, cheering for them, and ultimately very nearly deifying them because of what?  Because they can run faster, or shoot a ball better, or turn the pedals over harder than somebody else?  It seems kind of silly when I think of it like that, but consider me guilty as charged.  Floyd Landis hasn't necessarily let me down today; I think I let myself down by not having better discretion as to whom I choose to look up to.

And whenever I look up to somebody too highly because they appear to be so superior, I find myself at risk for getting let down when I realize that they fail and screw up just like anybody else.  I'm reminded of Dave Stoller in the movie Breaking Away.

For those few who haven't seen it, Dave emulates the Italian Cinzano Cycling team with such fervor, that he actually wishes to be Italian.  When he finds himself in a race alongside his heroes, and then subsequently in a breakaway group with the very cyclists whose images adorn his bedroom walls in poster format, one of the Italians jams his pump into Dave's spokes, causing him to crash out the race and trash his bike.  When Dave makes it home, tail tucked hard between his legs, his father asks him what is wrong.  He tells his dad, "Everybody cheats......I just didn't know."  And his dad replies, "Now you know."

The fallout from the Landis implications has only just begun and I'm guessing the press conference following today's stage at the Tour of California will be an interesting one.  I think I'll skip it and just go for a ride. 

If you've already had enough of this story, then let me direct you to another far more inspirational one appearing today in VOX about a local cyclist who IS in fact someone you can look up to.  Read it.

And then, if you've never visited Lieutenant Dan's blog, do so immediately.  It's right here.  But be warned, you might find yourself three new heroes: Dan, Maggie and Cassidy.

Resurrection

Spring is the time when emblamatic new life emerges from those things that lie dormant.  And frequently, we take inspiration from such things.  So too, in the world of cycling, which of us is not inspired by seeing those whose careers have taken a bit of a slide come forth once again to carry the day.  One might assume I'm speaking of Floyd Landis' second place performance at Battenkill last weekend.

Or maybe Cadel Evan's winning both the World Championships and also today's Fleche-Wallonne on an attack up the Mur de Huy, besting Alberto's entire index finger with merely his thumb.

There are other recent tales, like Riccardo Ricco winning the second stage and taking the leaders jersey at the Giro del Trentino today.  Ricco, of course, is trying to resurrect his career after being away from the sport due to convictions of doping, then leaving his girlfriend, racer Vania Rossi and their unborn child, when she too tested positive.  Susbsequently, Rossi's B sample came back negative and Riccardo "The Cobra" Ricco had a brand new head set design painted on his Bianchi.

Certainly, nothing inspires like a doper who leaves his partner and child, who then wins.  But two other recent tales of cycling resurrection have tickled my niggles even more.  The first is involving Lance Armstrong.  As everyone is well aware, in March of 2009, LA fractured his clavicle in the Castilla Y Leon race.  As he lay slumped over in the gutter, he began Tweeting about the occurence feverishly with his good arm (one-armed people can both drive AND twitter, in case you didn't know) and within moments, his became the most well-known collar bone in the world.  So momentous was this occasion, that the very ground upon which the bone was splintered became hallowed, such that the people of the nearby village of Antiguedad erected a monument to mark the exact location of the event consisting of a blue fendered bike, secured in a pedestal of cement and stone.

A plaque on the pedestal reads:

"La Clavicula de Armstrong

23-3-2009

Antiguedad"

I'm not sure why the good citizens of Antiguedad sacrificed what appears to be a perfecly good bike in honor of this event, or moreso why they angled the bicycle upwards like a giant erection....but I guess it's the thought that counts.  And by all accounts, people across the street from the monument   Europe reportedly stumbled upon flocked to the commemorative sculpture while walking their dogs to pay homage to Armstrong's fallen bone. 

Well disturbing news arrived last week when it was discovered that the monument had been vandalized and the bicycle stolen.  (I expect it to show up on FixedGearGallery any day now but with some deep-V Velocity rims, bright orange Oury handlegrips and an Aerospoke front wheel).  But town officials have assured the cycling community that not only will the site be resurrected, but it will now be made more difficult for vandals to get to.  Blessed be the bike that represents the collar bone.  Amen.

But none of these tales of resurrection is as exciting to me as the news that the Angle has risen.  Yes, the former Specialized Angel that used to appear at domestic and European races to represent the Specialized brand has been brought back and renamed the Angel of Echelon.  The organizers of the Echelon Gran Fondo series have "restored and resyled [The Angel] to emulate a protector and healer while still maintaing her celebrated allure and charisma."  In other words, she's still wearing tight clothes. 

"The angel character serves a dual role: one to inspire and support those off the bike and the other to captivate and cheer those on the bike," said Echelon Event Director, Hunter Ziesing regarding the Echelon series' new symbol which is designed to raise money for cancer initiatives.

I notice that the new angel comes complete with a bronzed breast plate that she didn't sport before.

I wonder if the new owners of the Angel thought she needed more protection.  Especially considering what happened to the old Specialized Angel at the hands of Cannondale.

Because as we know all too well, just because you've been resurrected doesn't mean you can't fall again.  At least we can hope so in the case of Ricco.

CCPB