By Jason van Marle

I really don’t equate myself with the likes of Emile Zola, nor is this a matter of treason and cover-up at the highest levels. I would merely like to speak out on behalf of Floyd Landis, and address the issue of drug use in cycling.

I’ve been watching the news and reading the various web sites the past couple days — Sport Illustrated, NPR, Le Monde, Het Nieuwsblad, AFP, Eurosport, LA Times, NY Times, The Daily Peloton, Cycling News, Velo News — to name a few, all with the same bad news, and a few with a verdict already implied in their headlines: GUILTY.

Phonak’s official statement read, “the Phonak Cycling Team was notified yesterday by the UCI of an unusual level of Testosterone/Epitestosterone ratio in the test made on Floyd Landis after stage 17 of the Tour de France.” Scarcely had the news been posted before some overly eager user updated Wikipedia with erroneous information stating that Floyd had tested positive for testosterone.

Walter Plankert, former cycling great and current sport director of Chocolade Jacques Cycling Team, had a nice quote in Het Nieuwsblad, “How can anyone be so dumb. Testosterone. That was already prohibited 25 years ago.” I agree Walter, especially considering all the drama leading up to the start of this year’s Tour with Operation Puerto.

And now begins the spin cycle where a rider swears his innocence, the tests indicate otherwise, and we sit here wondering who to believe. It reminds me of one of my favorite films, “Rashomon”, by Akira Kurosawa, a deceptively simple story that explores the complex nature of truth. The plot is straight forward. A woman is raped, a samurai is murdered, and 4 witnesses are called on to testify before the judge, which, due to Kurosawa’s shooting style, is the viewer. The point of the movie is not to find the hidden clue and out the guilty party, rather, it leaves the viewer with the unsettling realization that finding the truth is not always as easy as presumed. I like film critic James Berardinelli’s summary best when he writes, “perspective distorts reality and makes the absolute truth unknowable.”

But is the truth really unknowable in Floyd’s case? Either he did, or he did not take testosterone for stage 17 of this year’s Tour. He says no, his urine sample says otherwise, and just what does his positive test actually mean? In the World Anti Doping Agency’s (WADA) own words, “An elevated T/E may be an indicator of the use of a prohibited substance, and this guideline aims to assist Anti-Doping Organizations (ADOs) to make that determination.” The test results do not mean Floyd actually took testosterone, it means his A sample showed an abnormal ratio between two naturally occurring steroids in the human body, testosterone and epitestosterone (T/E), indicating possible supplemental testosterone use. However, illicit testosterone abuse is not the only cause of abnormal T/E ratios. So what might explain the spiked levels?

One possible explanation relates to his activities post stage 16. A 1998 study showed¹ that consumption of ethanol can disrupt the normal T/E ratio of 1:1. In short, consuming alcohol can alter your T/E ratio. Velo News reports, however, that Floyd’s doctor, Dr. Brent Kay, feels this is an unlikely explanation even if you include the Jack Daniels he and some teammates used to wash down the beer they had at dinner that night.

If this seems implausible, then under what other circumstances could an athlete produce a T/E ratio greater than 4:1 in a urine test? To find out, I contacted one of the country’s foremost authorities on doping in sport, Dr. Don Catlin. Dr. Catlin heads up UCLA’s WADA-approved Olympic Lab, which has handled doping controls since the ‘84 Olympics, and currently runs testing for the NCAA, MLB, and the NFL. I contacted Dr. Catlin’s office regarding Floyd’s situation. His response:

Furthermore, in an article published in Clinical Chemistry² in 1997, Dr. Catlin et al state:

To be certain, further testing over an extended period of time must be conducted to verify if Floyd’s levels are naturally elevated all the time, or if this spike was an anomaly.

There have been no T/E values published yet. Is Floyd at 15:1? 5:1? 4.001:1? Until we find out how great the deviation is, we can not be certain whether Landis is clearly guilty, or possibly victim of a naturally occurring physiological etiology. So until we know more, let’s all just take a deep breath, give Floyd a chance to prove himself, and then pass judgment. As Floyd said himself, his B sample will probably yield the same result. After all, the validity of the testing procedure is not in question, it’s Floyd’s T/E ratio. This means while a positive B sample will undoubtedly result in him being stripped of the title, it still warrants extensive testing and research, not a tar-and-feathering. WADA’s guidelines state more testing must occur at this point, and this will take time.

Regardless of whether his B sample is normal, or even if he proves his spike was from natural causes, this will always hang over him and there will forever be skeptics. It’s to the point now where winning the Tour is a thankless job, which only invites suspicion and scrutiny. From the Festina scandal to Operation Puerto, how many more scandals can the sport weather? Everything is in jeopardy, including sponsor’s financial support, rider’s careers, and most important, the fan’s support.

I personally have nothing to gain by Floyd winning or losing, but I can certainly look quite foolish and naive backing him in this day and age. I am not friends with him, and I am not a medical expert, so you have no reason to believe anything you’ve read thus far (although, you can draw your own conclusions from the references.) I raced against Floyd in 1999 and 2000 when he first switched from mountain bike to road racing, and I can assure you he was ripping guy’s legs off from the beginning. He caused the power house team at the time, Mercury, so much grief that spring they decided to hire him rather than fight him. A year later, in only his second season of road racing, he placed 4th in the Tour de L’Avenir –the amateur Tour de France. Success in road racing is nothing new for Floyd and it’s no surprise to see him winning the Tour.

So why do I believe Floyd when I’ve been rather skeptical of other professional athletes in the past? Just because you can’t find a rider in the peloton who can say anything bad about him doesn’t mean he’s innocent. His natural talent is unquestionable, but so are the test results for the most part. I’m not a CIA interrogator, skilled in detecting when someone is lying by observing their body language, but like many of you, I’ve been scouring the various news media for the past few days for any sign indicating a yea or nay verdict. I have years of racing experience both in the U.S and Europe, but never in the Pro Tour ranks, and I therefore can not say I am a qualified voice on racing at the top level. I can tell you, however, that not every rider in the professional peloton today chooses to use drugs to compete. I do have access to people who have known Landis throughout the entirety of his cycling career; they find it incredulous to think he would dope. One friend ads, “Floyd loves to race his bike, but it’s not like he grew up in Europe idolizing cycling. It’s not the only thing he lives for. He’d rather get 18th [sic] than take drugs to win.” (A reference to his time loss on stage 16, where he actually was sitting in 23rd afterwards.)

For what it’s worth Floyd, I believe you. You have to convince a lot of people, but hopefully they’ll give you that chance. Cycling is still a beautiful sport, and not everyone is guilty of tarnishing it’s image and reputation. It is everyone’s responsibility from the riders, to the managers, the officials, race promoters, the fans, and the UCI to ensure the integrity of the sport is maintained.

1. Clinical Chemistry, Vol 34, 1462-1464, Copyright © 1988 by American Association for Clinical Chemistry
   Effect of ethanol on the ratio between testosterone and epitestosterone in urine
   O Falk, E Palonek and I Bjorkhem
   Department of Clinical Chemistry, Huddinge Hospital, Sweden.
2. (Clinical Chemistry. 1997;43:1280-1288.) © 1997 American Association for Clinical Chemistry, Inc.
   Doping in Sport Symposium
   Don H. Catlin1,2,a, Caroline K. Hatton1 and Sanja H. Starcevic

   And for a good read on doping in sport, check out the old New Yorker article, “Drug Store Athlete”

Please Leave your comments on this subject.

It has already been said that Thursday’s Tour stage 17 was the one of the most exciting stages as of late, and hats off to the excellent live coverage on cyclingnews.com from those of us with no television. Floyd Landis rode his bike like a hero from the past; bicycle racing hasn’t seen anything like that since the eighties, some would say.

Landis was a renegade with his unconventional move, attacking with over 123 km to go and speeding away like a motorbike to the finish. On an extremely hot day, Landis was either pouring bottles of water on himself or consuming them — I stopped counting at seventy bottles. He powered up the epic climbs in his big chain ring, drilled it on the flats, and in the end, held a 5:42 gap over 2nd place Carlos Sastre.

A big break, big climbs, and a big gear makes Landis a true Viking. Few rides in recent Tour history compare: Chiappucci’s at Sestriere in ‘92, Jalabert on Bastille Day in ‘95, one of the early Lance mountain top victories are similar, but none dramatically changed the overall standings quite like Floyd’s ride of redemption. Sure there was Lemond’s increadible ride to win the Tour in ‘89, but that was more shocking than epic. One might have to go back further to the days of Bernard Hinault to find such aggression and willpower on the bike. A true champion overcomes adversity, and Floyd came back from a Tour ending deficit, and nearly climbed back to the yellow.

What happened the day before? Landis just had a bad day on stage 16 perhaps; he is only human after all — actually, he’s quite a bit above the regular human when it comes to power and endurance. But nevertheless, he mustered the courage and strength to pick himself back up and persevere in heroic fashion. Landis may support Nietzsche’s idea of a “superman” — can the superman in Landis change the tour into a victory for himself and team? We have only to wait until tomorrow.

-Skiles Keith