THIS WEEK IN PRO CYCLING »

Get the VeloNews Email Newsletter FREE

  Learn More | Archive
Home » Top Stories » News and Features »

Monday's Mailbag: Floyd's appeal; cheaters and prosperity; the rant; and Jonny's girl

Published: Oct. 15, 2007

The Mailbag is a regular department on VeloNews.com. If you have a comment, an opinion or observation regarding anything you have read in VeloNews magazine or on VeloNews.com, write to webletters@insideinc.com. Please include your full name, hometown and state or nation. Letters may be edited for length and clarity. Writers are encouraged to limit their submissions to one letter per month. The letters published here contain the opinions of the submitting authors and should not be viewed as reflecting the opinions, policies or positions of VeloNews.com, VeloNews magazine or our parent company, Inside Communications, Inc.

It’s time to move on
Editor:
I have absolutely no interest in reading about "He Who Shall Not Be Named" and his CAS appeal. It is time to move on. Please use the space for something useful and interesting.

Brian Long
Lafayette, Colorado

Make it stop
Editor:
Dear Floyd Landis: Please stop. We are all getting embarrassed for you.

Bret Martin
Oakland, California

But just one more question . . .
Editor:
In the unlikely event that Landis wins his appeal to the International Court for Arbitration in Sport, would the Tour de France organizers then "strip" Oscar Pereiro of his retroactive jersey and give it back to Landis?

Brian Clissold
Battle Creek, Michigan

Well, Brian, as we read the rules, the UCI would have to re-award the title to Landis, since the doping charge is the only reason it was taken away in the first place. While that might be acceptable to Pereiro, it may raise a few hackles at ASO. A favorable CAS ruling might prompt French anti-doping authorities to resurrect the case that was put on hold when USADA charges were pursued against Landis. Indeed, that would then trigger a whole new round of hearings, not only on the evidence, but on the French authorities' jurisdictional rights, which at the time of the Landis case, they had not yet handed over to WADA. Frankly, we haven't spent this much time worrying about the minutia of doping since the '70s. —Editor

Cheating is about more than wealth
Editor:
One of your readers wrote a letter (see Wednesday’s Mailbag: Cheaters actually do prosper”) saying that cheaters are actually winning when they make a lot of money and admit the doping years later. I think your reader is way off.

I just can't imagine that owning a multi-million-dollar house and a fancy sports car is a substitute for having to admit that you are a cheater to millions of adoring fans. Even the dopers work incredibly hard with their natural (and unnatural) gifts to achieve an opportunity to be a hero and a winner.

Please don't misunderstand; I'm not defending them. I just don't think that pro athletes' drive to win is based on wanting to own the latest Maserati. I think they cheat because they are so driven to compete and win, that they make really stupid choices sometimes.

Georg Egloff
Los Angeles, California

Remove the profit motive
Editor:
Regarding the letter about cheaters prospering, it might be correct to say that most anyone - cyclists included - will do anything to make a buck. But this makes punishment all the easier.

With doping, punishment should truly fit the crime by negating the motive: money. Take it from them. Everything. Liquidate all assets, leaving no more than, say, the level of wealth permitted in a standard bankruptcy case. And make certain you sell all those bicycles (preferably on eBay where I get a chance to pick up a nice frame or two for cheap).

For a determined length of time (five to 10 years?), the doper should also be required to pay a certain percentage of his/her income into a fund that underwrites further drug testing of athletes. Then ban the violator from the sport: no riding, no coaching, etc. Any current or future monies made from books, interviews, and so forth about the doper's life, crimes, and even recovery (which would complete one's penance, no?) should all go to testing and anti-doping efforts.

It is punishment in its simplest form. Threaten to take away someone's house, bikes and future income, and he may just not dope.

Of course, the drug tests need to be proven reliable, independent and highly accountable. The anti-doping crowd needs to get its act together, too.

Don Mutchler
Hattiesburg, Mississippi

Lab criticisms seem a bit overblown
Editor:
The vast majority of us accept at face value the testing done for/on us by medical labs to be reliable. We rely on these labs for a broad spectrum of diagnostic tests routinely ordered by our physicians. We accept their results to guide our own health-care and dietary habits. When is the last time you heard of anyone calling the results of such tests into question or taking the lab to court?

"Whoa — my cholesterol can't be that high. It's just because I ate a Ben & Jerry's triple dip cone just before the test. I’m suing to set the record straight!"

Yet cyclists, as a community, seem to believe there is no lab that can be relied upon when called upon to detect performance-enhancing substances... especially in our sport.

Robert Rasner
Los Angeles, California

Regarding the rant
Editor:
Usually I just find the rants to be funny, but I think the latest rant by Patrick O'Grady is absolutely spot on. Floyd is gambling with not only his career, but also his reputation, his money, and his fans' money. Here's hoping he gets what he wants — whatever that may be at this point. Obviously, being vindicated and getting back the 2006 yellow jersey would be ideal, but anything that helps to crumble the horrible despotism of the labs and the appeals process would be a victory in my book. I'm still with Floyd on this one. I prefer to think that the lab results are wrong over believing that someone would be so cripplingly, horrifyingly stupid as to dope with steroids on a day when he sets out to win both a stage and a jersey. Doping on a day when, if you are successful, you are 100 percent guaranteed to be tested makes absolutely no sense to me. That, and what seems to be incompetence at the lab, are why I'm still sticking with Floyd.

Suzanne Blockburger
Salt Lake City, Utah

I want Jonny’s girl
Editor:
All due respect to Jon Baker and his epic cyclocross adventure, but his wife is my new hero. Instead of getting, "Don't you think six hours on a bike is a little too much?" while a rake is thrust into his hand, Jon is getting carte blanche with unlimited bonus time. Talk about support — Atlas has got nothing on Mrs. Baker. In the immortal words of the Eighties pop juggernaught Rick Springfield, "Where can I find a woman like that? I want Jonny’s girl." Uh ... that is, if I weren’t already married and in love with my wife.

Craig Weimer
Morgantown, West Virginia


The Mailbag is a regular department on VeloNews.com. If you have a comment, an opinion or observation regarding anything you have read in VeloNews magazine or on VeloNews.com, write to webletters@insideinc.com. Please include your full name, hometown and state or nation. Letters may be edited for length and clarity. Writers are encouraged to limit their submissions to one letter per month. The letters published here contain the opinions of the submitting authors and should not be viewed as reflecting the opinions, policies or positions of VeloNews.com, VeloNews magazine or our parent company, Inside Communications, Inc.