Landis: They Wanted Me To Squeal On Lance

Cyclist Says Anti-Doping Agency Wanted Help Against Former Teammate Armstrong





Text Size:  A  A  A
Floyd Landis

Tour de France champion cyclist Floyd Landis at a news conference in Los Angeles, Thursday, May 10, 2007.  (AP)



Answers.com

(CBS/AP)  Floyd Landis claims the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency's lead attorney approached his lawyer offering "the shortest suspension they'd ever given an athlete" if Landis provided information that implicated Lance Armstrong for doping.

Landis said he made the Armstrong allegations public Thursday not because he planned to use it as evidence when testimony begins Monday in his arbitration hearing, but to show the lengths USADA will go to in prosecuting athletes.

The public arbitration hearing starts Monday, and the stakes are higher than just the possible two-year ban Landis could face if he loses. He would be the first rider in the Tour's 104-year history to be stripped of the title, and he says he'll retire if he loses and can't get the result overturned in appeals.

But the 31-year-old cyclist doesn't think he's going to lose. And he wants to use the 10-day hearing at Pepperdine University in Malibu, Calif., to deliver a knockout to the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency, the group underwritten by the American government and the U.S. Olympic Committee that Landis claims is fundamentally corrupt.

"If they lose this, they cease to exist. I don't see any other way," Landis said. "It would be no point in them going on.

"They've made such bold statements about how sure they are that this is the truth that there would be no point in ever accusing anyone again after I demonstrate that I'm innocent."

Despite a positive test for elevated levels of testosterone to epitestosterone after his stirring comeback victory in Stage 17 of last year's Tour, Landis insists he never has used performance-enhancing drugs.

The offer to implicate Armstrong "was offensive at best," Landis said during a teleconference from Los Angeles. "It speaks to the character of the prosecution."

The 2006 Tour de France champion said USADA general counsel Travis Tygart approached his attorney, Howard Jacobs, with a deal shortly after learning of Landis' positive doping test during the Tour.

He said Jacobs characterized the conversation as one in which USADA would offer a deal if Landis passed on information about seven-time Tour champion Armstrong "or information about someone more important than me."

Over the years, Armstrong has fought doping allegations that have never been proven.

As for what he told Jacobs when the attorney passed on the information: "I don't think that offer justified a response," Landis said.

Jacobs did not immediately return messages left at his office by The Associated Press, and Tygart held to USADA's restriction on commenting about ongoing cases.

"If Mr. Landis will waive the rule and allow me to comment, then I'll be happy to address his nonsense," Tygart said.

USADA has a history of reducing penalties for athletes who provide evidence of doping violations by other athletes, though asking for information about specific athletes is not allowed.

About 20 percent of the cases that have begun with an "adverse" drug test have been thrown out early in the process because of lack of evidence. But USADA does not lose cases when they reach the arbitration stage.

Armstrong and Landis are former teammates who went through an unfriendly split in 2004, but Armstrong has publicly supported Landis and been an outspoken critic of the way anti-doping agencies do business.

"I believe in Floyd, I believe he hasn't had a fair shake," Armstrong said recently.

The Armstrong revelation was the latest in a string of allegations Landis has levied against USADA and anti-doping authorities as he puts the final touches on his defense.

Over the past several months, he has toured the country to drum up support and money for his defense. He says the leak of the positive doping test last July damaged his reputation, and he's not even sure a victory in arbitration will repair all that.

Since being accused of doping, Landis has created the Floyd Fairness Fund Web site, through which he has raised more than $500,000 to help pay for his defense.

In the past, hearings had been closed to the public in part to protect athletes from embarrassing revelations. But at Landis' request, this hearing will be public. Landis wants to use the hearing to expose what he says is the fraudulent way the anti-doping people do business.

"The fact is that the people doing the testing, the people accusing the athletes, are far more unethical than the athletes," Landis said.






Text Size:  A  A  A

Comments [ + Post Your Own ]

Now you're in the public comment zone. What follows is not CBS News stuff; it comes from other people and we don't vouch for it. A reminder: By using this Web site you agree to accept our Terms of Service. Click here to read the Rules of Engagement.

Lance Armstrong is the greatest athlete in the last 50 years -

Support Lance and Flloyd ! Both great guys - as for the French - sorry but "ils sont les champions de toute le temps!"


Posted by karlimhof at 8:01 AM : May 12, 2007
+ report abuse + permalink
Start boycotting the sponsors that fire their athletes with no proof or conviction.
Shame on Phonak for Landis
Shame on t-mobile for Jan Ulrich
.
.
.
Yep its legal, but I don't use t-mobile (I did) because of it and hopefully I won't need a hearing aide soon.
Posted by whatworry at 7:56 PM : May 11, 2007
+ report abuse + permalink
I say let's hear what Lance has to say and to show. If he was hiding anything it wouldn't make sense for him to push a PUBLIC HEARING instead of a private one.

It also doesn't bode well that they offered Lance a "better"/rotten deal to turn in another athlete. I fhey are so above board, why do they need to behave like that? Makes noises of corruption and coersion under circumstances of duress.
Posted by baathsheba at 3:47 PM : May 11, 2007
+ report abuse + permalink
I say let's hear what Lance has to say and to show. If he was hiding anything it wouldn't make sense for him to push a PUBLIC HEARING instead of a private one.

It also doesn't bode well that they offered Lance a better rotten deal to turn in another athlete. Makes noises of corruption and coersion under circumstances of duress.
Posted by baathsheba at 3:40 PM : May 11, 2007
+ report abuse + permalink
"Landis: They Wanted Me To Squeal On Lance
Cyclist Says Anti-Doping Agency Wanted Help Against Former Teammate Armstrong"

Well that could be because Lance was guilty, Guilty, GUILTY!!!

And so is Landis.
Posted by randalds at 3:24 PM : May 11, 2007
+ report abuse + permalink
Here's a guy that has to beg for money to defend himself against allegations. Why don't we chase, with the same fervor, Barry Bonds, a wealthy, high profile athlete and suspected user of enhancing concoctions.

I have to laugh at Mr. Bonds, whose head and feet have grown to great proportions, who said he paid for "flaxseed oil" perscribed by his physician. Barry, I take flaxseed oil every day and I haven't grown like you have. Also, I don't pay thousands of dollars for my flaxseed oil.

This whole performance enhancement thing is a joke. Records and performance don't mean anything anymore based on comparisons to other decades.
Posted by bogusbones at 1:19 PM : May 11, 2007
+ report abuse + permalink
I most firmly believe that neither Landis nor Armstrong doped for the Tour. I believe the French were so pi$$ed that they lost (again) to an American they had to do something to try to drag the winners' names through the mud. It seems strange that the 'specimen' that they accused Lance of failing was several years old when they tested it! And then when another American beat them at their own game after Lance retired, they couldn't stand it.
Posted by gramto7 at 1:02 PM : May 11, 2007
+ report abuse + permalink
Once the allegation is made the stain remains, whether there is any truth to it or not. This is the way society works.

It is exascerbated in our current criminal justice system, where the accuser is above suspicion, shielded from ridicule, while the accused are thrust into the media's glare, the accusation already embraced as fact.

The only recourse for the accused is to shine the media's own harsh light back onto the accuser. This may help to level the playing field, but it will never completely dispel the original allegations of culpability.

The stain will always remain.
Posted by honest_news at 12:44 PM : May 11, 2007
+ report abuse + permalink
So, if an athlete "cheats" by using performance enhancing drugs, he should give back any medals/awards/titles? Then, actors who win awards/medals/titles should return them for their surgically enhanced efforts to be the best in their profession, as well. Each profession pushes the envelope to be the best. If they are willing to bear the heavy risk associated with the enhancement, why do we care?
Posted by kirstinharr at 12:23 PM : May 11, 2007
+ report abuse + permalink
I don't like the tour to beging with it is boring.
Posted by antoniof123 at 12:06 PM : May 11, 2007
+ report abuse + permalink

Back To Top Back To Top