Showing posts with label Lance Armstrong. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Lance Armstrong. Show all posts

26 February 2008

2001: a RACE ODYSSEY (Looking back to Lance's victory)

Fellow ZEN'ers, this is an absolutely priceless treasure you are about to read.


In vacuuming out the kilobytic cobwebs from the ZEN Central laptop, wondrous eyes came across the following translation of an article, that appeared in the French magazine Vélo, back in that fate and destiny–filled month of September, 2001.


This English translation is a pre–ZENmud effort, originally shared with friends on the Yahoo! Group 'EuroBIKE' grouplist sometime that fall or winter.


It's an important read for the WADAwatch or ZENmud audiences, for two reasons:


  • It offers a thorough and semi–scientific analysis of the 2001 Tour de France performance by the greatest tour de France victor of this modern era – Lance Armstrong – and, more importantly,
  • It may be one of the last French articles that admitted that Lance displayed a supra-normal capacity to train and to 'understand' his physiological capabilities, with a methodology that remains a quality that did set Armstrong apart, and above, the average or way–above–average Tour cyclists.

[It should be noted that this translation, for the purposes of copyright law, is properly protected as a 'Fair Use' exemption as educational material which would not otherwise be found translated in English. Finally, the interspersed notes within the text are those from 2001: only minor changes were effected this weekend, to 'disappear' some evidence of poorer French competence some seven years ago.]


Enjoy this 'Time Tunnel' experience!


'Profil de Killer’

(vélo Magazine; N° 379, September 2001)



Doped, or not? With each of his victories in the Tour de France, the question comes back onto Lance Armstrong. However, the American is a grand champion, worth more than this sterile debate. July brought ‘tangible’ elements on which one attempts, in five points, to define the real ‘profile’ of the racer.

By Fréd. Grappe


[An Abridged ZENmud translation: “LA” is Lance Armstrong,
some paragraphs have been split without other edits...]


The Tour has just finished, and again Lance Armstrong had a crushing victory over his rival Jan Ullrich. As in earlier years at this time, the same questions arise over his astonishing fashion of finding seconds in the mountain stages and time trials, in always ‘spinning’ [‘moulinant’: 'like a millwheel'] faster than his competitors. Over the last fifteen years, the striking image was that of racers pedaling in a much slower fashion.

Today, one has the impression that the videos are accelerated when watching the racer from Texas. However, the “Armstrong case” passes beyond what regarding him would suggest. [‘depasse ce que le regard peut suggerer’]

Armstrong’s arrogant success along the Tour routes - in time trials and in the mountains - seems to hold in a large part to the “mental” faculty he has to optimize his rate of energy expenditure as a function of the course’s characteristics, the terrain’s topology and the intensity of furnished effort necessary.


ONE: HE ROLLS ON ECONOMY
[mode]

Tenth stage – (Aix–les–Bains to L’Alpe d’Huez): Look at how LA won in analyzing his strategy 'du jour'.


Four Cols on the menu, 209 km.


Roux was the lone breakaway until climbing L’Alpe d’Huez. The battle started at the base of the climb, Armstrong having been ‘hidden’ in the leaders’ peloton all day. Strategy, to show the signs of a ‘really bad day,’ and make the others believe it. During the long day in windy conditions, this advantaged LA by allowing him to stay buried behind the few taking turns cutting the wind. [recalling mostly Telekom?]


LA’s estimated average power values on the two prior Cols (Madeleine: 24.8 KM at 6.3%; Glandon: 19.9 KM at 7.3%) were, respectively 360W (5.2 W/kg) and 340W (4.9W/kg). These are relatively high power levels, but no greater than a large enough number of racers are capable of: there were a sizable number of racers (and French) that were in the pack of leaders. The Glandon numbers show how Roux was able to conserve his lead; the leaders weren’t rolling intensely: arriving at the base of l’Alpe d’Huez “with strength” was on everyone’s strategic plan. Yet, some were ‘in the red’ already.


In this phase, LA rolled with relatively the same pedaling frequency as his competitors. He hadn’t put the ‘windmill’ into action! Explanation: rolling in a climb of average intensity, in a basically aerobic condition (and efficient oxygen utilization) as LA was pre-d’Huez, served to increase the ability to oxygenate the muscles, using strength while preserving the greater part of his energy reserves for the end of the race. This rate is defined by the relation of the power developed (Watts) divided by the oxygen consumed (VO2). As such, during the climb, there is a correspondence between the oxygen-consumption values and the power level generated. Power level is a value of force onto the pedal and cadence of pedaling. Yet, for any generated power level, there can be a variety of VO2 readings based on the number of force-cadence choices utilized. Therefore there are optimal values for force and cadence, to develop the level of power using the littlest oxygen possible. A graph of this relation shows a U-shape: VO2 rates are elevated when the force used is high and cadence slow, and again when force is weaker and cadence elevated while in both cases the power developed is the same. Oxygen use is elevated in slow-cadence situations due to a too-high muscular tension; on the other hand, high–frequency pedaling often results in ‘gesticulation’ by the racer and results also in being oxygen–costly. The optimal frequency for sustained climbing is around [+/-] 80 rpm.
In this case, it’s no use to turn the legs too fast. It would become too energy-costing, and more, while an important Col lies ahead. 80 rpm was the observed cadence with LA and a number of the racers surrounding him. However, others in the group were certainly under this optimal rate.


(photo: Lance and Floyd on
Col de la Faucille, above Geneva,
ZENmud copyright 2004)


TWO: THE ‘WINNING WINDMILL’
(la ‘moulinette gagnante’)



Now, when the race is heading to its climax, the rhythm augments significantly, the race's principal actors ready for the finale, strategy changes; including rate of power used in terms of force-cadence. As in a time-trial, the goal is to climb this last section (d’Huez) in the most rapid time possible. To not worry about physical repercussions that could follow. This was where LA put to the test his strategic “winning windmill” technique while the others were planted in their habitual low-frequency methods. Even with an elevated cost of energy to commence pedaling at 100 rpm, the resulting speed gain is a benefit.


In summing it up, augmenting the pedaling rpm in a critical exercise of power (to anaerobic limits) permits to increase 'running speed' of movement [‘de déplacement’)] all while optimizing oxygen-consumption. In fact, it’s the best bio–mechanical compromise.


Climbing d’Huez, 14.1 KM at 7.9 per cent, LA averaged 430 Watts of power (6.3W / 22.1 km/h). This impressive average level, sustained throughout the 38 minutes, included a cadence between 90 – 100 rpm. At 80 rpm, the gearing used must have been at 4.61 m (39x18), at 90 rpm, 4.09 m (39x20 OR 21) and at 100 rpm 3.86 m (39x22 OR 23). Knowing this, it serves to have a freewheel without ‘gaps’; to be able to optimize cadence with the intensity of the moment. LA thus utilized a freewheel going just to 23 teeth, with progressive spacing. Some racers use gearings that jump two teeth: this often has a negative effect to maintaining optimal cadences. So, racers ‘submit’ to the slope, instead of ‘accommodating’ it. Just what they DON’T want to do.


In the following stages, LA economized in much the same way, during the first 90% of each stage, then going for it in the finals. This was to do nothing other than apply the well-founded techniques now well-known that report that, as power augments, the faster the frequency must be, rising equally to minimize energy spent. [. … .] LA in effect furnished about 45 minutes of effort a day, in the finals of the mountain stages. He knew also that doing this for a series of days in a row would force him to ‘leave some feathers’ on the course. Let’s check those figures.


13th
Stage – Foix to Saint-Lary-Soulan (194 KM); six Cols. Jalabert’s great day … LA didn’t catch him until with only 5 KM left to Pla d’Adet. Jaja did Portillon (8.4 KM at 7.3%), Peyresourde (13 KM at 7%), Val-Louron-Azet (7.4 KM at 8.3%) at the following estimated power levels, respectively: 350W (5.1W /kg), 320W (4.7 W/kg), 310W (4.5W /kg). The values decline, as Jaja fatigued, doing the lonesome cowboy.[’faisait cavalier seul’] In Portillon, even, his effort was rather strong. Yet the group with LA had made up time in every climb. For Armstrong, on Peyresourde and Val-Louron-Azet, his values were estimated for both climbs at 370W (5.3W /kg), showing a good tempo. Yet, also showing it was not as high as at L’Alpe d’Huez. Still, Armstrong’s efforts on the last two climbs would show up in the next day’s analysis.


14th
stage – Tarbes to Luz-Ardiden (144.5 KM) : Three big Cols: Aspin (12.1 KM at 6.5%) Tourmalet (16.9 at 7.4%) and to Luz-Ardiden (13.4 KM at 7.5%). Armstrong & Co. did la Tourmalet at an average of 350W (5W /kg) . As is his habit, LA exploded in effort to Luz with an impressive 430W (6.2 W/kg), nearly duplicating his d’Huez performance. Clearly, LA can turn it up a level on command, exposing his full potential after riding hours without anaerobic efforts.

What can one say, however, about racers who do not or cannot augment their cadence while augmenting their power? They have every chance to induce:

  1. an augmentation of the mechanic constraint imposed on the lower muscles and joints coming from the high tension developed; effects can include blocking of capillaries, alterations of blood flow and muscular pains;

  2. lactate buildup in the muscles, producing the well-known fatigue to legs and arms;

  3. neuromuscular fatigue, corresponding to central and peripheral sensations;


On the other hand, augmenting the cadence can reduce the accumulation of lactates in the active muscles by the diminishing of the force furnished. This would retard the onset of fatigue sensations. Muscular trauma is also reduced, recuperation is better.


THREE – A RESERVE OF SPEED ENERGY


LA is simply using well-founded scientific principles. He can augment his cadence because he can ‘turn it up’ on demand. Having his “fast” pedaling technique allows him to do something Jan Ullrich just cannot do – he is locked into his classic, heavy-pedaling style. LA’s supple pedaling includes good elevation of the heel on each upstroke, gives a slight release in the muscle tension and an optimal pulling of the pedal by the rising leg. But the key to that is perfect coordination. Thanks to this technique that is associated with excellent pelvic alignment on the saddle and the shoulders with the handlebars, he can optimize cadence. Did these discoveries come to LA via his SRM crankset, which measures power developed, and hyper-pushing his training? Or has someone guided him and coached him into this high search for excellence? Is there always no mystery about that or is it that he just can, in mountains and time-trials, employ these techniques? Easier to understand why Ullrich is blocked – he cannot adjust for augmented force with an elevated cadence: he cannot find the good connection between force and cadence at the crucial daily moments. He doesn’t have the reserve of a fast cadence in his training program. However, while Ullrich could be potentially stronger than LA, Armstrong however, with his bursts of speed, develops a power advantage grace of his extraordinary velocity. If Ullrich could augment his cadence 5 to 10 rpm without losing his level of force, we’d be watching a ‘match equal’ between the two. Ullrich should do so, as it is easier to train to spin faster than to augment force levels.

FOUR – THE ALTERNATION WITH “DANCING”
[French for climbing out-of-saddle]


One other dominating factor for LA is his ability to alternate time spent in the saddle with that spent ‘dancing’ on the pedals: this created big differences in the mountains. Again, a bio–medical explanation clears it up. Switching from one position to the other (standing to sitting and reversed) relieves the muscles which strain in one position and not the other. LA can work in alternation, on the two sets of muscle combinations, optimizing again his expenditure of energy. Even with ‘dancing’ taking more energy, the gain in force is higher and the reduced effort expended by the muscles which are primarily used when sitting is a benefit. By dancing into a heavy acceleration, LA initiated each of his daily victorious attacks. That permitted him to make a difference in only two kilometers, with an augmented level of force. Afterwards, he ‘played an equal game’ with Ullrich and the other leaders, settling for that earned advantage and then marking time to the finish. Just normal as he recuperated from the effort. Preserving the cadence used at that point, permits LA to not explode, optimising energy expenditures.


His domination in the mountains rests principally on the ability to alternate from sitting to dancing, at one optimal cadence and with a energy reserve allowing the accelerations. One must know that such reserves improves with training. That training forces the body to accept working in a state of lactic acidosis (in the presence of toxins) after the difficult-to-support training sessions.


To climb while dancing, at a fast cadence, Armstrong-style, requires a good mastery of flexibility, an excellent fixation of the pelvic basin and the shoulders, and a special pedaling dynamic that is difficult to master without long and intense training. With each leg extension, while holding his body far forward allows him to push very efficiently, almost as a sprint runner pushes on the starting blocks. One thing is certain, after specific training, to climb a Col at an elevated cadence both sitting and standing is very much possible.


FIVE: THE MODEL OF AERODYNAMISM

In a flat time-trial, performance is largely dependant on a critical power elevation (anaerobic ceiling) and a very aerodynamic position. Uncontestable that LA possesses the former, starting with the high-cadence factor. Once again, that permitted him to expend energy optimally. Yet his other talent is the result from wind-tunnel testing the optimal riding position. Nothing is left to chance, as for example his helmet’s form, adapted to his body lines. The entire rear half is enclosed, so no air enters, and ‘drags.’ The helmet is an important element in the diminution of drag turbulence behind the head of any racer. Forearm position on the pads of the aeros, and their spacing on the bars, are perfect. Even more, LA’s high pedaling cadence ALSO helps diminish slightly the air penetration equation (confidential information!). Being aerodynamic is so important because for any given position, the power developed evolves in function of the cube of the air speed.


This implies that the more the speed is elevated, the more the variation of power must be significant to augment even slightly the speed. The position astride the bike determines what we call the SCx (drag coefficient), a function of the frontal surface (a shadow projection from the front serves well) and the racer’s form (round back, flat back). As such, shrinking the SCx 10 per cent has direct repercussions on developed power by augmenting significantly the speed. [? ‘vitesse de deplacement’] Profiled helmet, forearms very close and the flattest head-spine line possible could reduce the SCx as much as 5, 3 and 10 per cent respectively, or cumulatively 18 per cent SCx reduction (SCx passing from 0.28 m2
to 0.23 m2) .


In the first 13.5 KM of the time-trial to Chamrousse, Armstrong was the ONLY of the favorites to have a helmet. And it was he, that rolled at the highest speed at this part of the course, doing 41.2 km/h against 40.8 for Ullrich. A difference of 0.4 km/h corresponds exactly to that which one gains with an aero helmet. Why did the other racers not do the same thing? Certainly because that appeared no sweat to skip it for only 13 km. But why hasn’t Jan ever effected the wind tunnel tests (even if his position seems already very aerodynamic)?


Armstrong won the TT in managing his effort in two times: The first flat half (0 – 13.5km at 1.6 per cent), where LA was estimated at 370W (5.3 W/ kg). A priori, his departure was prudent. In revenge, the second climbing part (13.5 – 21.5 km at 8.1 per cent and then 21.5 – 32 km at 6.1 per cent) was measured at 410W (5.9 W/ kg). The previous evening, he’d climbed d’Huez at an average of 430W for 38 minutes. Normally, with an exercise of slightly more than an hour’s duration, his strength would be lower.


Back at the prologue (Dunkirk – 8.2 km), the specialists were all tricked out, from helmet to spokes. Obviously nothing is left to hazard. Attention to the smallest detail; positions are studied and restudied. Estimates for the first five finishers show about 470 to 450W. This type of effort corresponds universally to an supercritical exercise realized between the critical intensity (Red zone or anaerobic ceiling) and the maximum optimal aerobic power. That’s done at roughly 90 per cent of the PMA [No definition…] It is physiologically impossible to sustain such a high level of effort for more than 15 minutes.


In reality, the mastery of effort for such a prologue is physiologically more complex in its analysis. Moreover, the performance is bio–mechanically dependant on the relation between developed power and the SCx (power/SCx). The ideal is to develop maximum watts and minimizing the friction induced by the bike/ racer ensemble, who passes swiftly through the relatively still air molecules. Weight is primarily a factor when re–accelerating. Prologue results show that LA did not pass a PMA superior to other participants (which should be somewhat encouraging, somehow).


That suggests that the performances he established elsewhere are essentially dependent on the manner in which he exploits his aerobic potential (oxygen utilization). One can think that he’s capable of exploiting a percentage of oxygen consummation very high from his training realized in ‘critical strength mode’ which corresponds just right with his other performances up final ascents and in the TTs.


One more information that could permit to bring back LA and his performances ‘to earth.’ During the last TT (Montlucon – Saint-Amand-Montrod; 61 km), which LA won, if Didier Rous had rolled with a more aerodynamic position, he wouldn’t be far from an nearly-equal match with Armstrong. In fact, given his position (SCx estimated at 0.25 m2
) one can say that Rous did the TT at an average of 370W. This same measure gave LA force to roll at an average of 49.2 km/ h and to take 2’25” on Rous (time split between them at finish), based on LA’s better aero position gave a 12 per cent lower value to his penetration through the air (SCx of 0.22 m2). This aerodynamic gain cannot be very far from reality. This analysis suggests that, on that day, the strength levels of two athletes should be relatively close. Remember this, however, that Rous gave as great a performance, but was simply ‘glued’ by his lack of aerodynamic position. This should serve to bring LA down to earth for his competitors and certain detractors, and incite a number of racers to work – in a certain dimension of cycling that they perhaps have never explored.


Finally, if one could risk to give a physiological profile of LA, it would be the following: a PMA of 500W (7.2 W/ kg), a critical power level of 430W (6.2 W/ kg) (for which he can sustain a 45 minute duration), a great lactic resistance (which permits his accelerations), a finely-honed aero position, very flexible supple pedaling style stemming from his excellent pelvic – thoracic stability on the bike. That package, equipped with a mental force beyond the common and a body prepared to suffer real pain to a high level. A profile to dream about!


Last point, is that the described pedaling and mountain techniques don’t have anything to do with that usual style needed in 80 or 90 per cent of the year’s races, the mostly ‘rolling hills’ [‘vallonée’] style. To tame [’apprivoiser’] the mountains, it’s necessary to love them, respect them and give to them an amount of time, LOTS. They don’t spare the foolish!


So, Lance Armstrong, extraterrestrial? Of course not. An ‘obsessed’ worker with an eye to the details, yes of course. He represents the extraterrestrial only to those who swear only by dopage. If there was any doubt, it would concern the ability LA has to string his fantastic performances together, day after day. Such recuperation seems incredible. All the while, he’s not the only in the peloton to be capable of stringing performances together. Other racers, of whom one may be quasi-certain that they’re racing “à l’eau claire” [clear water] were equally intrinsically very performant all the time…


[A postscript stated that the values stated in the article, while based on estimates, are done so taking into account racer, weather and other factors, and should be systemic, meaning any estimate for one racer should have a certain level of “inter-individual” reliability]

+ + + + + + + + +


ZENmud's comments pertain only to the following point:

If a section SIX could have been developed, it may have detailed how Armstrong's mental force, merited through becoming the champion to beat, was yet another tool he used; developing tactics that effected and tamed competitors. They knew how strong he'd become, they’d seen him, raced against him (or heard reports), and the effect of seeing it happen certainly could have been demoralizing. If Lance knew that and could consciously make use of it tactically, it'd be like throwing each following cyclist a brick – a greater weight to carry: behind the champion.

+ + + + + + + + +


welcome back from your trip back into an era when it appeared that at least one competent French author believed that Lance's superiority had valid, scientific, studied reasons for his overwhelming Tour de France successes. Little did we ZEN'ers know how this all would evolve years later...


___çç*******/ ZENmud \*******çç___
© 2001 and 2008


29 August 2007

WADA do about THE BIG PICTURE...

[Dear ZENers, this column has been CORRECTED and REVISED, with those actions shown in yellow text Sept. 7 2007]


Dick Pound, Floyd Landis, Patrice Clerc (nom?), Lance Armstrong, Jacques de Ceaurriz, Pierre Bordry, Emile Vrijman, Christian Prudhomme, Travis Tygart...

What do these nine names have in common?

They comprise three Americans, one Canadian, a Dutchman and four French... Two Tour de France victors, six blatantly biased detractors, and one objective investigator...

President of the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA: Pound); Winner of the 2006 Tour de France (Landis), President of Amaury Sport Organisation (Clerc), Seven-time Winner of the Tour de France (Armstrong), Directeur of the former Laboratoire nationale du dépistage du dopage (LNDD: de Ceaurriz – LNDD was recently 'Phoenix-ed' into the “Département des analyses”, under the French Anti-doping agency: AFLD), former Minister of the French Ministry for Youth and Sport (Bordry: scroll to EN translation of a FR press release from AFLD), former Director of the Netherlands Centre for Doping Affairs (Vrijman: download the PDF report), Directeur of the Tour de France (Prudhomme), General Counsel for the United States Anti-doping Agency (USADA: Taggart)...

Is it possible that they are a mixed salade: of manipulators, profiteers, victims and a white Knight, all due to the current RAGE against doping in cycling?

A righteous rage gone haywire, an ignoble pursuit of a noble goal, that is currently displaying the dark underbelly of the Anti-doping movement. Unarguably, the cleansing of cycling is overdue: cycling is one of the oldest sports of the modern era, a sport which, all admit, has experienced a long, historic system of doping, through seven generations.

The summer of 2007 fades: it is three months now, since Floyd Landis faced the modern equivalent of a medieval Inquisition against witches and heretics... his hearing for an Adverse Analytical Finding (AAF) 'found' by the French LNDD, pursuant to its tests (in its Châtenay-Malabry labs, a Parisian suburb) on participants of the Tour de France.

Floyd faced this armada of legal talent as David faced Goliath, armed with scientific data and legal analysis, paid for by thousands of believers who have chosen to fund his legal fight for legitimacy towards his victory of 2006.

This hearing was to be a slam-dunk against Landis, in the words of USADA attorney Richard Young, because of their evidence: "The science is solid."

What appeared to have actually happened, could perhaps be better described as a 'farcical comedy', 'charade' or 'fraudulent', perhaps, concerning the Prosecution's case.

Entering a world of anti-doping CODES, evidence and Standards for laboratories, 'aliquots', urinalysis, and the several hundreds of thousands of Euros in testing apparatus, the Prosecution was victim of itself, victim of a legal 'Rope-a-dope'. Only the Landis defense itself was able to do, what the Prosecution claimed they would: offer testimony of cold, hard science that was turned inside out, as the Defense showed time and again that the Châtenay-Malabry lab had failed in its duties to uphold worldwide scientific standards, of competence and confidentiality.

Past readers perhaps can recall this writer's angle on the affair, however it bears to be updated here: that there is a disbelief in certain circles of France, and elsewhere of course, that America could produce, in the talents of Lance Armstrong and Floyd Landis, eight consecutive victories in the Tour de France – without recourse to 'le Dopage'. These outstanding results by Landis and Armstrong relegated two national French heros, Jacques Anquetil, and Bernard Hinault, to glorified runners-up as five-time winners of the Tour de France (At least one of whom had admitted in his lifetime to ingesting 'assistance' of a chemical nature).

In the case of Lance Armstrong, the LNDD facility produced a dubious report, citing his alleged 1999 EPO use, concerning his remaining 'B Sample' urine specimens remaining from the 1999 TdF. 'Dubious', in that the testing that was achieved was 'novel', done under the guise of 'research', the use of which (for doping-control purposes) was illegal according to WADA rules and preceding IOC rules (WADA itself became an official entity in 2003: it had no jurisdiction over the 1999 samples that remained in LNDD custody), and of the bright-line separation of 'research testing' from 'doping control testing'.

In subsequent press articles, Dick Pound supported 'his' laboratory, the LNDD (Pound is far from being the most neutral mouth on the planet, as would befit the stature of his post as WADA President, and this Organization that he strove to legitimatize), and argued privately and publicly that the Union Cycliste International (UCI) should take action in light of this incriminating evidence against Armstrong.

Emile Vrijman, noted Netherlands sports law attorney and former Dutch Anti-Doping Agency Director, was mandated by the UCI to draft and produce an independent review of this 'case'.

The LNDD, and the French Ministry which controls LNDD, were never 'transparent' or accommodating, as to requests by Vrijman for documents and data concerning the 2004-2005 testing of the 1999 B Samples they retained. De Ceaurriz and Bordry, in harmonized language, denoted the impossibility of cooperation with an 'independent investigation' (Ie: not supported by a French Court's legal order to comply).

(see Vrijman report, pp. 50 (!), as well as 16, 20-22, 37, 47, 121, 126, 128)

It is not beyond objective suspicion, after publication of Vrijman's UCI-mandated report, or the timing of its release in May, 2006, to link the subsequent backlash by WADA President Dick Pound, due to its overly-negative contents, with certain following events affecting Landis and the TdF.

In apparent eagerness to avenge the Vrijman report, could cycling's heavyweights and the Gods of Anti-doping take barely conceivable steps, of which even the most lax observer could barely believe any of the actual evidence originating from what has become 'L'Affaire Landis'?

Jumping ahead, we pass over the Stage 17 victory by Landis, his epic solo breakaway, a majestic tour of assorted Haute-Savoie cols that ended in Morzine (where this author stood applauding, less than one hundred meters from the finish line).

Remember: Floyd was tested EIGHT times in the Tour, and seven of his A Samples were returned negative (four times prior to Stage 17, and three times afterwards).

We fast-forward past the critical urine test of his Stage 17 A Sample, that resulted in his positive AAF. Unlike other, typically suspicious announcements of TdF testing results being leaked by the French sporting newspaper L'Equipe, Landis' A Sample test result was announced publicly by the UCI, presumably in anticipation of publication in l'Equipe, of information that should have remained confidential until the confirming B Sample examinations had occurred.

Nevertheless, Floyd's test result was announced: apparently revealing an abnormally low level of epitestosterone, which skewed his T/E ratio (Testosterone/Epitestosterone) to 11:1, far beyond WADA's allowable 4:1 ratio.

The witch hunt began... and L'Equipe sold quite a few papers in those slow-sports-news days of August. Oh: you do know, of course, that the company run by Monsieur Clerc. ASO, owns both the Tour de France AND the Equipe journal? Interestingly for past readers, M. Clerc is a past French Tennis champion, and also former Director of the tennis club-stadium Roland-Garros, which was referred to in this column regarding the ITF's dispatch of tournament drug samples to Montreal's anti-doping facility. Read it here...

Hmmmm...

According to Floyd, he was contacted in August or September, 2006, by staff of the USADA, and offered the following 'option'. In return for a simple one-month suspension, atypically far shorter than the WADA CODE-proscribed two-year suspension for a first-time doping offense, Floyd would 'simply' have to help USADA, by turning in former teammate Lance Armstrong for his supposed doping practices, presumably while they were teammates at the formidable US Postal team during his historic streak of TdF victories.

Something in there, smacks of premeditation.

Something in there, tears asunder the threads of logic...

Could a laboratory in France, under its Ministry of Youth and Sport, which had been legally reamed by the Vrijman report only a month or two before the commencement of this 2006 TdF, seek revenge against Lance Armstrong through the person, the reputation, of one Floyd Landis?

The mind boggles... if true.

A simple recap:

1999 – 2005:
Lance wins seven consecutive Tours de France.

NB: Which relegated the five-time winners: two French, one Belgian, and one Spaniard to the new second-place tier...

2004-2005:
LNDD performs 'research' on samples from the 1999 TdF, for EPO, samples that then were five years old.

NB: previously, in 2000, LNDD published the results of similar research it had performed, on retained B Samples from the 1998 TdF. Those results were published in the scientific journal 'NATURE' in June, 2000: no athletes were known to have complained (where 28 of 102 tested anonymous B Samples showed evidence of r-EPO presence of over 0 – 3.7 IU per liter). It remains disturbingly unclear why LNDD did not choose to have its second analysis of the 1999 B Samples also published in NATURE or another scholarly journal: unless this 'research' was not scientifically sound.

23 August, 2005:
French journal l'Equipe published its scathing article entitled (FR) 'Le Mensonge d'Armstrong' (“Armstrong's Lie”), spun out of LNDD and French Ministry information, and pinpointing Lance Armstrong, and no other rider, as being one of six 'authors' of positively-tested 1999 TdF samples.

NB: Which instantly generated a thunderbolt of negative press against Lance, his teammates and his sponsors, one month after his glorious moment in Paris, on the Champes Elysées.

NB TWO: This article is no longer traceable by title on the 'l'EQUIPE website (Title above), but you can read about it here, in FR. Mostly listing reactions to the shock, of their scandalous false "testing".

Autumn, 2005 to Spring 2006:
Based on LNDD 'research' and the incriminations in the disparaging article published by l'Equipe, WADA adamantly suggested that the UCI initiate investigations as to the feasibility of disciplinary hearings against Lance Armstrong. WADA did so, knowing well that its suggestions were reproachable, per its own regulations.

UCI contravened, however, and announced its 'independent investigation' under the mandate issued to Emile Vrijman, attorney from the Hague, and former Director of the Dutch Anti-doping Agency.

WADA, LNDD and the French Ministry, who'd thus promoted 'convicting' Lance through the press (l'Equipe), in the intervening months began to withhold cooperation from the UCI-mandated report.

(Entities acting in concert, both together and independently, to trumpet the (Illegal) use of 'research results': See Vrijman, pp. 18, 26, 43, 55, 75, 94, 96, 101, 122, 128, 129)

May – June 2006:
The Vrijman report was published several weeks before the 2006 TdF;
Dick Pound reacted quite strongly in the press.

July 2006:
Floyd wins the TdF this one and only time, following a massive 'bonk' or loss of energy in Stage 16, and a gloriously historic, spectacular solo breakaway in Stage 17, along with a fantastic final Time Trial finish that sealed his lead, and gave him his victory over runner-up Oscar Pereiro.

(TdF trivia: no 'Grand Champion', between Armstrong, Indurain, Hinault, Merckx, Anquetil, EVER won a TdF in a year ending in xxx6)

Late July – early August 2006:
Floyd is pronounced as Positive for an excessive testosterone/epitestosterone ratio, from the Stage 17 A Sample test, a blow which subsequently forced his team, PHONAK (Swiss manufacturer of hearing aids), to withdraw from the cycling-sponsorship business.

September 2006:
Floyd alleged that he was approached by USADA staff, who offered him a 'sweetheart' deal if he turned informant against Lance Armstrong; according to Floyd he emphatically dismissed the idea of squealing.

Fall of 2006 – to Spring of 2007:
Floyd prepared for and submitted, in May 2007, his arguments and evidence before a panel of Arbitrators belonging to the American Arbitration Association, while facing USADA 'evidence' and hearsay testimony by Greg Lemond, also a three-time winner of the Tour de France.

Summer 2007:
Floyd and his supporters, WADA, the AFLD and USADA await a timely, reasoned written decision by the Arbitration Panelists. Once announced as coming out prior to the 2007 TdF, this article is publishing in the last week of August.

+ + + + + +

LNDD, the same lab that failed to conduct proper research, as required under the Declaration of Helsinki and the WADA ISL and IST documents, nevertheless used those results to damn Lance Armstrong in the court of public opinion.

LNDD, which declined to assist in the Vrijman investigation as to how those results became known to the reporter from l'Equipe, is the 'player' that provided the only positive test result against Floyd Landis in his long career, a positive result that, by the testimony of experts in the Arbitration Hearing, had exceptionally disregarded most of the scientific and investigative norms found in the WADA CODE and International Standard for Laboratories.

Is this evidence of a massive State machination, by elements under the Chirac government, to cut down – to surgically remove – from the glorious, illustrious annals of the Tour de France, the greatest living racer of all time (Armstrong)?

Is this evidence of intergovernmental and inter-Agency collusion, feeding on the blind ambitions of prosecuting attorneys and specious public servants? They who, at any cost, and damn the rules and regulations that control such efforts, lusted to create scandal and seed more doubt, in hopes of bringing down these two Americans victors, Lance and Floyd?

Were their hopes restricted to restoring the mythic 'Five Victories' threshold that stood so many years?

Or, conversely, maybe perversely, is this case merely a publicity stunt? A stunt that simultaneously increases awareness and thus financial support for the Anti-doping entities that are growing fat on increasingly available public money, and demeans the efforts of the UCI Federation, through serial victimization of presumptively-innocent, distinguished World Class Cyclists?

Should an Athlete like Floyd Landis, who had to raise legal funds exceeding $2 million to fight a case against a lab result generated by a facility with a litany of seriously egregious errors, be entitled to recuperate those funds in the case where the decision falls towards his innocence of these charges, through laboratory, government or ADO malfeasance?

Questions unanswered, as of yet...

And furthermore, even more incomprehensively, is this:

If in fact Floyd's Positive AAF is reversed by the AAA Arbitrators' decision, he could be forced to face appeals, by virtue of the WADA CODE, that could or would be lodged not only by the prosecuting Agency USADA, but also from:

b– the French AFLD (if WADA CODE Article 13.2.3, which states “...and any other Anti-Doping Organization under whose rules a sanction could have been imposed;...” is the basis under which AFLD has repetitively announced that it awaits the decision of the USADA arbitration before commencing actions against Floyd on its own),

c– the UCI (doubtfully would they enter the case), and

d– WADA.

Is that clear? Here's an imperfect analogy: if your brother is found 'not guilty' in Minnesota for stealing a car, this WADA CODE provision might allow Wisconsin, Manitoba or Mexico to appeal the case to the Swiss Tribune Federal!

WADA, aka Pound, is dripping with vitriol against Armstrong and Landis: what portion of WADA's annual budget would be subverted into chasing the appeal against Landis?

AFLD, as mentioned, remains bloodthirsty for Landis, and has merely 'extended a courtesy' to its American counterpart – USADA – by delaying their own 'prosecution' until the American Arbitration decision: this potentially allows them a supra-legal status: as initiator of a 'double-jeopardy' attack against Floyd, a potential 'Appellant' in the USADA v Landis case, and as potential 'Appellant' in the potential AFLD v Landis case...

Heavy stuff...

This reeks, with the bile of disgust rising in the throats of above-average sporting-litigation observers.

We wait, pensively...

We don't understand the longevity of deliberations that continue to foster tensions, towards an announcement of this decision, now perhaps the equivalent of a seismic event of 9.9 on the open-ended Richter scale...

Changes, chances...

This fall will bring to a motley end, the First Dominion of WADA, as Dick Pound abandons the scepter of power (and benefits: unlimited First Class Travel to EVERY World Class global sporting event, anti-doping seminars, etc., which more than make up for his 'selfless' choice to draw a salary of 1 Canadian dollar/year). Pound leaves the helm of a ship that is decidedly adrift, and losing the moral support of Athletes.

Scheduled this fall are important redrafting sessions for the WADA CODE, to be held in mid-November, in Madrid, Spain. You can download a REDLINE v2 of the revisions document here.

This session will theoretically address the apparent shortcomings of these Inter-Agency documents, hastily implemented in 2003 and 2004, which have created certain innocent victims, while providing initial steps to global harmonization, an as-yet unattained goal. It would be interesting to ascertain how WADA will seek to reduce the Conflicts-of-Interest created as the WADA CODE superseded the IOC Medical Code, and began funneling 'research funds' to the 34 accredited laboratories.

As Dick Pound leaves WADA in November, a bit sullied, rumours abound that Monsieur Lamour, former French Minister of Sport, will 'win election' to replace him.

Dick... Who had himself hoped that, despite his fury, his belligerence, his bellicosity, and his disregard for his WADA CODE, that his stature would make him a natural, victorious candidate for the Presidency of the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS/TAS). The news from CAS/TAS this summer, however, was for continuation of the appointment of its Interim President, apparently squashing the hopes of Mr. Pound to continuously inflict the world of Sport with his personal 'duty' to create injustice.

Egos? On the line; every day, everywhere, in each press report...

Winners? Displays of the finest and worst definitions of 'winning'...

Losers? Will we ever really know who actually loses, from the Floyd Landis case outcome?

Consequence(s)????


........................................................ ZENmud