Step Down

Hardworking?

full-time workers in France are guaranteed BY LAW at least five weeks vacation per year, work maximum 35-hour work week which gives them 22 more day off per year if you compair it to 40hr US work week.

PLUS

France leads all nations with 39 national public holidays per year; we have 12 in the U.S of our employers count Columbus and Veterns days.

The French may work hard "when" they are working but "when" are they working? . Viva la France!!! I need to move and quit putting in 55 hour weeks and taking the crap around here. OUT.................

steppy

Trevor98

Hematocrit is indeed testable and limited by the UCI to a 50% level. However, a high hematocrit level does not specifically indicate any form of doping but rather it shows a dangerous blood chemistry that the UCI states is unsafe for athletic participation. Any cyclist with a hematocrit level over that limit is disallowed from participation for a number of weeks but is not charged with doping- regardless of the cause of that violation (unless the cyclist has an abnormally high level naturally).

Because it is not particularly rare for an athlete to have a natural level over that arbitrary 50% (normal is between ~38%-46%) and many more cyclist can surpass that limit through legal means (altitude training or tents) using hematocrit levels to assume any type of doping is just moronic. A high hematocrit level can simply mean a high hematocrit level and nothing more.

It is my belief that the hematocrit level limiting has probably reduced doping in cycling far more than any other single decision any authority has made. Because it is not punitive but preventative and it doesn't matter how a rider surpasses that level and the penalty is two weeks suspension cyclists and team management are highly motivated to test under that level at all times. Some may argue that diluting a riders circulatory system with a saline IV can lower the hematocrit level some and pass the test but the relatively low hematocrit limit keeps the violation in check in check far more than easily circumvented drug testing for each specific drug (HGH?)

It is very easy for many athletes to surpass the arbitrary 50% hematocrit limit with completely legal technics that come with far less risk to the teams profitability than illegal means of achieving the same hematocrit level- especially considering the non-testing types of doping busts (OP). However, this only applies to hematocrit boosting types of cheating.

Flak

It's like that almost everywhere. Americans work more hours a year than any other 1st world country on earth. Labour laws are still skewed heavily in favour of the employer in America.

Grasschopper

Hang on there hoss. Bjarne Riis says we should look at things from the past...only look forward. He also owns a top Pro Tour team and also pretty for sure was a doper. No one is yanking his TdF win or pointing fingers at his team...even though 2 of his riders...one of those his top rider...are implicated in Puerto.

I don't believe for a milisecond that Riis didn't play a roll or at least know about Basso's doping.

Demit

Actually the US is seventh.

Flak

Really? Got a link to the list?

USAZorro

DMF - I'm with you up to the end. Why do you think a U.S. Court would claim to have jurisdiction? I can see there being an appeal, but not to the DOJ.

Trevor98

Landis may have multiple avenues of appeal. First is the offical route of CAS which will can (in)validate the decision in true appeal fashion.

Secondly, there is the civil court system in every jurisdiction involved. The most plausable and Landis-friendly system would appear to be that of California's (he is a resident). Their ability to make decisions on this case would most likely come from the fact that this is, at base, an employment issue. Landis' ability to work in his field is based on the outcome of this hearing. California has particularly protective worker's rights laws and USADA would be stupid to chance violation of those protections. Additionally, California's tort system is notoriously generous in awards given. Theoretically, Landis could sue and win in court more money than the USADA's budget of quite a few years.

Additionally, he make take this tactic regardless of the outcome of the hearing as the whole case has harmed his earnings potential and his legal fees are monumental. Another target of such legal manuvering may be Pound himself due to his outragous comments throughout the investigtion.

As for jurisdiciton, courts have an amazing ability to figure out which cases they have juridiction in. They also decide which cases have merit and which do not to the bafflement of many. There is no real way to predict with absolute accuracy which cases will go all the way and which won't. Some real questionable cases have become case law that should have never seen the inside of a court room.

I do really agree with DMF that contradictory legal decisions in this case could stress the inherently weak international laws on employment and sport. I doubt very much that much national political attention would be spent on such a minor issue as the future of Landis- national governments have bigger issues to consider.

bellweatherman

Lance sucks.

Ih8lucky13

I knew that you were a Lance Bass groupie, thanks for telling us what we already knew.

Prince9931

What line of recourse would the average fan of cycling have for someone that they have a suspicion of some type of doping?

rufvelo

Herbal tea, testosterone patches, tea bags.....something very fishy going on here (or down there).

rufvelo

I'm sorry but I've already published the list, there is absolutely nothing we can do now :

1) Armstrong - Not Guilty
2) Basso - Guilty
3) Landis - Guilty
4) Ullrich - Guilty
5) Millar - Guilty
6) Valverde - ?
7) Rumsas - Guilty
8) Pereiro - ?
9) Hamilton - Guilty
10) Frigo – Guilty
11) Vandenbrouke – Guilty
12) Musseuw – Guilty
13) Simoni - ?
14) Garzelli - ?
15) Cunego - Not Guilty
16) Lemond - Not Guilty
17) Hinault - Not Guilty
18) FIgnon - Not Guilty
19) Merxkx - Not Guilty
20) Vlaeminck - Not Guilty

bellweatherman

Lance is more guilty than either Basso or Ulrich, both of whom have never tested positive. Lance did test positive. Not just for hard work as the joke goes, but for EPO and another masking agent.

Trevor98

How is Armstrong more guilty? Guilt is binary- you either are or are not. We could argue about partial guilt but that is still guilty but less culpable.

Rotten Bastard

I don't want to hijack this thread too far off topic, but the 35-hour work week is just a technical thing they tried, in an effort to lower unemployment. I've been to Paris 8 times and spent a total of 6-7 weeks over the years, and everywhere around the city you'll find people plugging away at their jobs, blue collar or white. My French friends work 10-hour days at their offices, and often eat lunch at their desks. Culturally, they do place a high value on good living, but the image of French people sitting around in cafes all day is just a stereotype.

DMF 

He did? Care to fill us in?

rog

Someone went back and tested one of his samples from his first Tour win (1999), and it came up positive for EPO. However, it was rife with...you guessed it...procedural incompetence and a blatant disregard for protocol.

DMF 

Oh, that was the one where an independent auditor recommended that WADA fire the lab and a few personnel. Also, as I recall, that it couldn't be established that it was LA's sample in the first place. That couldn't even be called a test, much less a "positive" one.

bellhead, please try not to misrepresent facts. It's likely to get you on Ignore lists.

Trouduc

The sample from Lance's 99 Tour de France did test positive for EPO, however, there was no "B" sample. Therefore, technically, Lance Armstrong is clean. Its pretty sad that few in the media have mentioned this little tidbid. Basically, Lance is as clean as a mobster acquitted on procedural issues.

Trouduc

Of course not. There are degrees of guilt. Our whole justice system is predicated on that. Do we really have to go through this?! Means Rea, etc... First degree, second degree, etc....

Smoothie104

Garzelli was tossed from the 2002 Giro and banned for 2 years, he should be marked as guilty..

Fingon in an interview I read in cyclesport some years ago said in regards to doping "I did what I had to do, if I die before I turn 50, thats my business" so he should have an asterik

Merckx failed tests as well.

Simoni tested positive for cocaine.


I had a similiar list going for World Champions a year ago or so on here.. same result.. Almost everyone a doper

bellweatherman

Yep, Lance tested positive. For hard work? Uh, yeah whatever. For EPO. He got off on a technicality and threw a bunch of misinformation about lab protocols that his supporters believed. He is far more guilty than Ulrich, Basso, and the other riders in the Operacion Puerto investigation who, BTW, did not test positive. Ever. Lance did.

Trevor98

That is not degrees of guilt but severity of a crime- yes I'm quibbling but guilt is binary logic. Stating that "[Armstrong] is more guilty than either Basso or Ulrich" is absurd. They either doped or didn't- regardless of who got caught or who got off. Right now none of them has been proven guilty (yet) so not one of them is more guilty than the others.

How can one more guilty than the others?

mutantdunk

I used to have a 51% hematocrit when I was in my 20's. I just had alot of red cells. Now my crit is in the 40's. I'm 47 now. I really haven't measured it lately though (I work in a hospital lab).