Comment The case for Landis (Score 1) 259
As an IT professional, I have a different view on the matter.
1) We all know that the vast majority of security incidents occur from within an organization
2) If you're looking at data, and 1 sample is far beyond the standard deviation, you toss out that 1 data point.
3) If you don't follow manufacturers requirements, you do not get support, and YMMV with that equipment.
4) You use unique ID numbers to associate different data entries
What does this have to do with Landis?
1) The time stamps on the datafiles used in the case against him have differing creation dates and modification dates. This was after the initial red flag went off
2) The SOP for the T/E test specified that a sample outside the standard deviation of 4 was unacceptable. Landis sample B was 14:1... Had they been following their own SOP, they would have tossed this result as erroneous
3) The computer used to interface with the lab equipment ran OS/2, but the manufacturer of the lab equipment had only certified the machine against Windows.
4) The samples used in the case against Landis had a different ID number than Landis.
This whole case just illustrated the level of incompetence at the lab. To this day, I wholeheartedly believe that Floyd Landis won the 2006 TDF. Not because I'm naive, but because the case against him was so flawed. Had this been held in a US Criminal court, it would have been thrown out. But the WADA doesn't follow a typical court model, nor does the Court of Arbitration for Sport.
In regards to the stage in question. Landis was one of the first to race with a power meter, not just in training, but in the race. He had realtime numbers on his wattage output. He was able to determine that his effort was within his limits based off his training. Also, he used a huge quantity of water, but only drank a small portion of it (this is shown on the footage). He actively worked to keep his core temperature down by pouring something like 14 water bottles over himself.
