Armstrong donated $100K to UCI in 2005

Paul Kimmage may have an axe to grind - and a fairly extreme perspective on Armstrong - but the Landis accusations are certainly major. Interestingly Armstrong apparently donated $100K to the UCI in 2005 for the development of the sport. Nothing wrong with that, unless clearly linked favourable treatment followed. And there's no evidence of that - is there?

In aid of transparency and the resolution of any apparent or perceived conflicts of interest it'd be interesting to see details of all such donations to the UCI over the past few years. Have other riders given similar sums?

Kimmage: Landis Allegations Will Decide The Sport’s Future | Cyclingnews.com

He did acknowledge that the UCI had received money from Armstrong. “The UCI received $100,000 from Lance Armstrong in 2005, four years after this incident was supposed to have taken place.” McQuaid then explained: “The UCI would accept donations from anyone who’s prepared to give. We’re a non-profit-making organisation so we’re prepared to accept money from anyone who’s prepared to assist us in developing the sport.”

Armstrong refutes claims, asserts he was expecting them

Armstrong Rejects Landis Allegations | Cyclingnews.com

He pin-pointed a lot of people and I mean, let’s be honest. Obviously my name will be at the top of the story and my name will be in the headline. But, it goes from myself to Johan, to Levi, to Zabriskie, to Andy Rihs, to Jim Ochowicz to Michael Barry, to Matthew White, to Steve Johnson, to Pat McQuaid. At the end of the day, he pointed his finger at everyone still involved in cycling, everyone that is still enjoying the sport, everyone that still believes in the sport and everyone that still working in the sport was in the cross hairs.

I’m standing here with you guys because I won the Tour de France seven times. But, you have to keep in mind that the yellow jersey of this race [Dave Zabriskie] is also in the cross hairs and that is not by accident. Maybe that is a good strategy to get more attention but if I look at, I can use Allen Lim as an example, someone that I view has the highest standards and the highest ethics of anyone in this sport, the fact that he is thrown in there speaks volumes to the credibility of this and I think that’s, if I walk away with one word to sum this all up - credibility. Floyd lost his credibility a long time ago.

Landis dobs on ex-teammates. If true - and proven to be true - what happens next?

Why confess after so much effort was expended on denials? Why implicate just about everyone he has ever ridden with? Armstrong, Hincapie, Leipheimer... and Bruyneel of course. Is it revenge, or a need to clear his conscience? It's an amazing co-incidence, to have Dave Z leading the ToC right now and to be named by Landis along with the all-star cast of past colleagues.... mind you, at least one of these emails reportedly date back to April 30.

Apart from the riders implicated in various forms of abuse, there is a report of money paid to silence a positive finding against Armstrong. Of course this is really nothing new, similar allegations have been made by many people - except that it's a former team-mate saying it. Whilst these are untested allegations it does signal a major drama for the sport in the coming months.  


Report: Landis admits doping and fingers Armstrong - Yahoo! News

Landis, who was stripped of his 2006 Tour de France title for doping but had always denied cheating, sent a series of e-mails to cycling officials and sponsors acknowledging and detailing his long-term use of banned drugs, the newspaper said.

The report said Landis wrote in the e-mails that he started doping in 2002, his first year racing with the U.S. Postal Service team led by Armstrong.

Landis also admitted to doping in an interview with ESPN.com.

Landis also accused American riders Levi Leipheimer and Dave Zabriskie and Armstrong's longtime coach, Johan Bruyneel, of involvement in doping, the Journal reported.

YES! Rasmussen is OUT!

I said I was uneasy.. but I feel a bit better now. Not 100% but at least 95% confident that the playing field is levelling... it's like pulling teeth, without anaesthetic.

I'm not saying Rasmussen is guilty, or Vinokourov, or even Landis for that matter. I'm not saying that at all.

What I am saying is that I'm pleased to see tough, consistent action taken - finally - when things are not as they should be. The waters are murky. It doesn't look right when riders perform 'out of their skin', especially so when past performances don't stack up against current heroics. Let alone when they are surrounded by the rumours and innuendo that attach to these people. Anyone can see it, feel it, smell it. It's one thing to be a champion, another to be deceitful or just unhelpful. When lack of cooperation or openness clouds an issue we naturally smell a rat, and in this case we finally have rat catchers who mean business. This sort of open, clear and decisive action - at any immediate cost to the team, the race or to the sport itself - should happen in all sports, or not at all. Either legalise and control the doping or cut it out. At this level of importance, where people are influenced to do things that may compromise their health or longevity, where people are deceitful and manipulative and their objectives unspoken, everyone suffers. The cheater and the cheated. And the manipulators and profiteers who lurk unseen behind the cheats should suffer the consequences, too.

Foster this time. And more on Floyd

It's hard to pick what to read... or make of it all. Robert Foster (Gerolsteiner) won today's stage of the Giro. That's the good, sporting side of cycling. But Greg LeMond somehow got drawn into the Landis drug hearings... sigh. It's looking very, very sad. Come clean, Floyd, is what LeMond has apparently said. But Floyd stands firm. It's the alleged nasty little phoned threats that make it seem just a bit more... ummm... apparent... that there's a story here that Floyd's "friends" may not want to be told. Will the truth step forward, please?

A wrap-up of results and stuff...

Well first of all an ibike update. Battery is still good at 280V, and I finally filled the data log memory. It takes about 2 weeks of 1-1.5 hour rides. Still works fine, although I suspect that it is adjusting the altitude that I set it at as the barometer rises... that's not a huge error. I should be starting my rides at about 60m above sea level but today my local hill had grown to 175m. Hmmm. I'm getting used to riding for power measurement and remembering to minimise my coasting. I find myself sprinting downhill just to lift my average... with has crept from about 160 up to just under 190W, but if you play with your data (it's a CSV file that you can dump into a spreadsheet program like Excel or OpenOffice) and remove the zeros the average is more like 220W now, up from just under 200. That makes sense as you are really interested in what power you can develop, not how much freewheeling and downhills you can conjure up on a ride...

On other matters, like Basso's suspension and Landis's ongoing laboratory problems, there's a nice summation of where we are at here at Bicycling mag. Cofidis pro Bradley Wiggins reckons it's good for cycling to have Basso suspended (BBC report here). Meanwhile CyclingPost tells us Cunego has won Trentino again. And PEZ on how to ride a Gran Fondo is a good fun read. And lastly don't miss the fun at the Rundfahrt... Graeme Brown is in 3rd overall and has got a 2nd and a 3rd so far. CyclingNews report here.

Landis: more intrigue

We can't we just do it right? Why does every move that could 'prove' Landis innocent - or guilty - have to be tarnished with suspicion, doubt and intrigue? Today we seemingly have L'Equipe reporting on the unreleased results of the USADA's test of the previously untested TdeF B-samples. (The respective A-samples were negative, only stage 17 came out with an inappropriate epitestosterone ratio.) Whilst we are fascinated to learn that some of these show synthetic testosterone, it's disappointing that we are yet again reading a leak. Why can't we see results released in a proper, controlled way? It gets worse. The Landis legal team has claimed that their UCLA independent witness was denied access during at least some of the tests. If true, why allow access sometimes and not at other times? Why immediately throw the tests into doubt by excluding an independent observer? Why would you do that?

You could blame L'Equip. They could indeed show more restraint. But we don't shoot the messenger, do we? You could blame the leaker - he or she could also just act appropriately and resolve the matter. But they are only human. You could blame me - and yourselves - too, for wanting to know so badly that we have created the very demand that makes leaking worthwhile. But (if true) how do you explain the subterfuge involved in excluding the observer? Why does it have to be this hard?

Cyclingnews reports here and the Sydney Morning Herald has more.

Why Floyd was not super human at all

Interesting take here on whether Floyd really needed any super-powers to do what he did on that fateful stage, from the BikeBiz website. Of course it wasn't super-human, plenty of riders before him have successfully broken away from a peleton and gained the types of advantages quoted, what's more important in the Landis situation is his co-incidental drug-test positive on that same stage. I think most people now agree that the alleged drug abuse would not have given him more than just a mental kick, if indeed he knowingly took the drug, which of course he denies. Only Landis, or perhaps some conspirators somewhere, really know the truth. Anyway, here's the quote:

"And on the CycleOps website, Dr Lim has an explanation of why the stage 17 victory by Floyd Landis in the 2006 Tour de France was not "super-human" or fuelled by testosterone but was well within typical power outputs of Landis and had a lot to do with tactical errors from the peleton and the fact Landis could take on board more water than the chasers.

Lim said: "What is very interesting about the [power] data from the climbs is that it shows that Floyd gained much of his time on the field not on the climbs but on the descents. He's well known as the most talented descender in the pro peleton, and he definitely put on a clinic on S17.

'Because of the direct and immediate feedback from the power meter, Floyd came to an immediate and extraordinarily important realization during his ride -- that every time he poured ice cold water on his body, his power output went up.'"