This is a review of the book, Positively False by Floyd Landis. To buy this book (and to support ElvisKennedy.com) click HERE. The book reviewed and referenced is the first edition hardcover.
While I don't look to athletes
for a philosophy on life or for a list of how-to's to excel
in a sport, I do like them to offer at least a little bit
of insight into what their life is like, both inside and
outside of sport, when they offer up an autobiography. And
a little bit is what you'll get with the Landis book. You
will not learn what the life of a pro cyclist is like. You
will not learn the in's and out's of training. What you
will learn is that Floyd Landis wants you to believe that
he is just an honest, hard-working, simple young man with a
dream. A dream that has been stolen by the administrators
of the sport of pro cycling.
Here is the simple TV Guide-type of review; Landis is a
poor boy who uses the bicycle to break away from a strict
Mennonite upbringing. While the lessons of hard work and
honesty are indelibly left on the boy, he is interested in
seeing what else the world has to offer. Through hard
training and perseverance he is given a chance to ride a
bike professionally. A few small wins and lots of hard and
honest training allows him a chance to give his body up for
his teammates, time and time again, just so that they can
win and take the glory. He's still just an honest and
simple boy and that's OK with him. Then, after years of
toiling in the shadow of people like Lance Armstrong, Floyd
Landis is finally ready to take a shot at winning the
world's toughest and most prestigious bike race, the Tour
de France. Saddled with a degenerating hip Landis ignores
the pain that would force other riders to give up riding,
and powers his way into the yellow (race leader) jersey.
Then Landis loses the yellow jersey by falling miles behind
the other riders in the race. Just when all hope is lost
Floyd Landis rides the most amazing come-back in the
history of the sport and eventually wins the Tour de
France. He has fulfilled his boyhood dream. But the glory
is short-lived. The incompetents who do the drug testing
have made a terrible mistake. Through mismanagement,
inaccurate use of testing machines and mislabeling of urine
samples the anti-doping crowd claims that Landis used a
prohibited drug during his comeback ride. Landis, still the
honest, hard-working boy, refuses to lay down for the drug
lords. He was raised to fight injustice and that's just
what he does. He surrounds himself with other honest and
hard-working individuals and together as a team they fight
the dishonest drug lords step for step. Will Landis' find
vindication? Will Landis be banished from the sport he
loves? Only time will tell. This book is at once
heart-warming and heart-wrenching. Come along for the
roller coaster ride that is the life of one of America's
brightest young stars - Floyd Landis.
Of course here at ElvisKennedy.com we don't give you crap
like that. You want hard-hitting analysis. So here we go.
You know the story of Landis so I won't waste your time
rehashing the book. Other than telling you that Landis goes
to great lengths to let readers know that he was raised by
parents who instilled honesty above all else in their
children. Hard work and fair play are part of that honesty
ethic. And the rules that Landis lives by. Since Landis
tries so desperately to make the readers believe that he is
nothing if not honest, let's analyze his story from that
point of view; that he is honest. And why not? An honest
rider wouldn't cheat. An honest rider would not take any
substance that gave him an unfair advantage. An honest
rider would not lie.
1) By the time Landis was 14 years old he was hanging
around the bike shop and reading bike magazines so much
that he was known as a "shop rat" (p. 7). And yet some
seven years later (he is vague on dates throughout the
book) he claims that he had never heard of the Tour de
France (p. 21). How can you hang around a bike shop reading
bike magazines all day and not know about the Tour? Yes, he
was a mountain biker at the time but he had been in Europe
for the World's and had been racing for years. Hard to
imagine any pro rider not even being aware of the Tour de
France.
2) After having a bad day in the 2002 Tour in which he was
supposed to have paced Lance Armstrong up the mountains
Landis tells the story of how Armstrong came into his room
and said, "It can't happen like that", followed by Johan
Bruyneel who said, "This is unacceptable". What Landis
fails to comment on is what was found in a text
conversation between Jonathan Vaughters (friend of Landis)
and Frankie Andreu in which Vaughters relays a story told
to him by Landis that Lance Armstrong and Johan Bruyneel
took Floyd into the bathroom during the 2004 Tour and
dumped his blood down the toilet. Blood that was to be used
by Landis to refill his red blood cells via blood doping
(For the full text of these messages see From Lance to Landis by David Walsh,
page 306-310).
3) After spending much of the book telling us how honest he
is, he decides to keep the knowledge of his degenerating
hip away from his team (Phonak). Even during salary
negotiations. Here is the Landis plan, "To keep the surgery
a secret, Brent (Dr. Brent Kay) made me a fake removable
cast for my perfectly fine right ankle. If anyone asked why
I was on crutches, the story was that I had twisted my
ankle, and that I'd be fine in a couple of days" (p. 103).
Wow! Mr. Honesty lying to his team so that he can sign a
contract for more money! Moreover, during a pre-season team
physical Landis is dishonest with the team doctor about his
hip (p. 105).
4) He tells a story about early season training in
Switzerland with Lance Armstrong. In passing he makes a
comment about Lance's "training advisor" (p. 57). Landis
completely ignores that fact that this "advisor" is one
Michelle Ferarri, the mastermind of many a pro cyclist's
doping program. Landis also fails to mention that he too,
is using the very same "training advisor". For more on
these training drills with Dr. Ferrari see, Lance Armstrong's War by Daniel
Coyle.
5) Just before the start of the 2006 Tour many riders were
implicated in the Spanish doping ring. Including two of
Landis' teammates. Landis agrees to kick the riders off of
his team although the only evidence comes from media
reports (p. 137). In contrast to much of the book were
Landis cries foul that he has been convicted in the press
without a fair trial.
6) Just prior to the 2006 Tour Landis told the Phonak team
manager that he needed some time away from the team and
that he would not be participating in a training camp. And
although riders are supposed to let doping control know
their whereabouts at all times Landis, "Didn't tell anyone
where I was going". His team manager, "probably assumed I
was headed to southern Spain" (p. 141). In fact, he went to
southern California to hang out with his doctor friend,
Brent Kay. He also visited one Dr. Chao for a cortisone
shot to alleviate hip pain.
7) On page 143 Landis complains that Ivan Basso, Jan
Ullrich, Francisco Mancebo and Alexandre Vinokourov were
withheld from participating in the 2006 Tour due to
"suspicion" and a "stupid technicality". Interesting to
note that since the publication of the Landis book all
four, ALL FOUR, of those riders have been proven as dopers
and cheaters (well, Vino claims that he's going to fight
but both 'A' and 'B' samples showed that he was riding with
someone else's blood in his veins).
8) Both Dr. Chao and Dr. Brent Kay are now with Landis at
the 2006 Tour and in fact meet Landis in his hotel room for
a cortisone shot (p. 148). Other than the unusual
circumstance of having two physicians hanging around your
hotel room in the middle of the Tour is also places the
players at the scene if in fact Landis cheated during the
2006 Tour. Sometimes it's just better to keep your mouth
shut.
9) "When the doping topic came up among riders, I never
engaged in the conversation. To me it was boring" (p. 196).
I simply can't buy this statement. You ride a bike just
about your whole life. Your business, your job, your
livelihood is riding your bike. To claim to never have had
a conversation about the single most prominent aspect
(currently) of your chosen career is either a lie or just
plain stupid. Sweeping statements like this serve one
purpose, and that is to avoid discussing what you knew and
when you knew it, and about who. Let me ask you, dear
reader; When a pro cyclist claims to never have had a
conversation about doping, can you believe him? It's one
thing to claim to never have done dope, but to never have
spoken of it?
10) "I did not use performance-enhancing drugs in the 2006
Tour de France or any other time in my career" (p.
196-197). Sounds good, right? Wrong! What about blood
doping? That's not a performance enhancing drug. What about
testosterone? Is it a performance enhancer or simply
something to aid in recovery? Define career; just during
races or since that day you signed your first pro contract?
The list goes on. I find it curious how careful pro riders
are when they say things like this. It's like Lance telling
us on and on and on, ad nauseum, that he's never failed a
drug test. It's meaningless. How about this, " I (pro
cyclist name here) have never used nor am I using now, any
technique or any substance that was or is prohibited by any
cycling team, cycling race or cycling governing body. I
have never used any substance or technique that would serve
to mask or otherwise hide my use of any of the
aforementioned. Further, I have not, am not and never will
use any substance that I believe (or wish) will give me any
advantage over any other cyclist (assuming no other cyclist
is using such substance). If any medical condition requires
the use of any prohibited substance as a treatment, I will
refrain from entering any race until such time that I have
been off of the treatment for a minimum of thirty days. As
testament to all of the aforementioned, I hereby authorize
the cycling authorites to take up to two pints of my blood
(over the next six months), as much urine and as many
tissue samples in which to use now or at any time in the
future for the purposes of determining my claims herein. If
future tests become available that can show the use of
prohibitive techniques or substances, so be it. I also
authorize authorities to use any blood, urine or tissue
samples currently on file to determine if I had ever used
any prohibited substances in past races". I'm sure that I
can clean this up but hey, I'm in the middle of a book
review and it''s the middle of the night.
11) In discussing the possibility that his 'B' sample test
may or may not confirm the conclusion of the 'A' sample
test Landis says, "If the lab made the mistake once,
they're bound to make it again" (p. 203). This is
disingenuous. This logic would conclude that if a lab ever
made a mistake, it would always make the mistake.
Therefore, every rider should fail every test. Fact is,
only Landis failed tests done after Stage 17.
12) Discussing the possibility that Lance Armstrong had
doped, Floyd has this to say, "At this point, whether or
not he was doping isn't really even the point. To me the
point was: They didn't catch him. They had all those years
and they didn't catch him" (p. 209). Throughout the book
Landis claims that his only motivation is to fix the
problem with doping and how testing is done, i.e. Floyd
Fairness Fund. So what is the insight here? That Floyd
didn't care if Armstrong cheated? Or that his years with
Armstrong taught him that you can cheat and get away with
it? If what he says is true, that the point is that
Armstrong didn't get caught, one can only conclude the
latter.
13) Continuing the discussion of Armstrong's possible
doping Landis says, "No possible good could come from
rooting up the past" (p. 209). Untrue. If we can't learn
from the past we are destined to make the same mistakes in
the future. If Armstrong did cheat and get away with it
then every other pro rider must consider the cheating
option. If Landis wants to fix the sport he must look to
the past and not ignore it. I also find it odd that Landis
seems to be protecting Armstrong at various stages of the
book. Why? He spends no time defending Tyler Hamilton or
any other cyclist charged with doping. He even repeats
Lance's mantra for us, "His (Armstrong's) blood and urine
was tested more than anyone else's, and he never returned a
positive test" (p. 209).
14) In an almost funny moment (thanks to hindsight),
Landis' friend and partner Will Geoghegan says this
regarding the doping authorities, "They (doping
authorities) have no regard for the truth" (p. 209). This
is a real pot calling the kettle black moment. Here we have
Landis putting forward Geoghegan as some arbiter of truth.
Geoghegan, if you will recall, is the guy who phoned Greg
LeMond and threatened to reveal that LeMond had been
sexually abused as a child in an attempt to keep LeMond
away from the Landis doping hearing. Who you are can often
be seen in who you surround yourself with. One of Landis'
closest friends is a real bottom-dwelling scumbag. Make of
that what you will.
15) More on the LeMond incident. When Landis realized that
Geoghegan had threatened LeMond it was dinner time the
evening before LeMond was scheduled to testify at the
Landis hearing. As soon as Geoghegan confirmed the threat
Landis says, "The only thing I knew right away was that
Will needed to go. I went to his room and helped him pack
his things" (p. 304). If this is true then why was
Geoghegan sitting behind Landis in court the next day? Why
did Landis publicly fire Geoghegan the moment LeMond
testified to the phone call? If Geoghegan "needed to go",
why wasn't he gone? Could it be that the Landis team hoped
that the threat had worked?
16) "Grasping for any shred of evidence". "A real double
standard". "They have no interest in hearing what an
athlete has to say" (p. 226-227). This is how Landis
portrays the request for additional testing on seven urine
samples of his from the 2006 Tour. In the search for truth
you would seek evidence wherever you can find it. But
Landis was adamantly opposed to additional testing and then
gives us this very negative portrayal of the people who
wanted more tests done. And of course he completely ignores
the whole point of this exercise; all seven samples
confirmed that he cheated, see HERE. You see, most people will read
a book and take it as it is. If it is written then it
must be true. Landis knew this when he wrote the book.
The thing Landis didn't count on was one Elvis Kennedy.
I don't make this stuff up, I just report it. The only
double standard is Landis denigrating the testing
authorities for seeking the truth and then ignoring the
outcome. Had the tests come back clean do you think that
he would have ignored that? It's like this; If you have
the facts pound the facts. If you have the truth pound
the truth. If you have neither, just pound.
17) This has got to be my favorite passage. One of Landis'
"scientists" is working to, "tear apart the science of my
test", by coming up with a theory as to how a super honest
and clean rider like Landis could possibly fail a drug
test. Here is that theory, "There are signs of some sort of
bacterial contamination. He (scientist) believed that an
unknown bacteria was metabolizing epitestosterone, which is
why the level in my sample was so low" (p. 254). This is
more fantastic than the 'water over
the head' theory! Think about this for a minute. An
UNKNOWN bacteria was lurking around in Landis' urine,
affecting the outcome of testing. Disregarding the
possibility of such things as UNKNOWN bacteria think of
the possibilities here. Every athlete on the planet
could use this. That's not EPO in my blood, that's a
by-product of some UNKNOWN bacteria. That's not someone
else's blood cells in my blood, that's the by-product of
an UNKNOWN bacteria. Barry Bonds, you didn't use
steroids, you simply have been contaminated with an
UNKNOWN bacteria. I have only one thing to say about
this; Ay, carumba!
18) Landis claims that his Floyd Fairness Fund will
continue long after his case has concluded. "I will
continue the fight, for everyone" (p. 285). Time will tell.
There you have it. In a book where Floyd Landis tries so
hard to portray himself as an honest-to-the-core guy we
have many inconsistencies. Most of which are not
insignificant. Lying about your hip problem during salary
negotiations results in ill-gotten financial gains. Lying
about your whereabouts in the weeks leading up to the Tour
would keep doping control at bay. In the final analysis you
have to decide for yourself whether or not Landis is
someone to be believed. Especially on the big question; did
he dope?
I have given you thoughts gleaned through my reading of the
book. Read with a critical eye. If you care about the
integrity of the Tour de France and cycling in general you
should read the book. Read everything that you can and then
make up your own mind about the state of the sport. Does
doping happen and if it does, what does it do to our sport?
What is the impact on the cycling world when dopers like
Bjarne Riis lie, lie, lie and lie about drug use and then,
ten years later say, "Oh, yes, I did dope when I won the
Tour de France". This book is but one piece of the puzzle.
The book is a quick read and contains no real surprises. I
give it 2 out of 5 stars. It only merits a 2 because of the
subject matter. It'll never be re-read like good books are.
For pictures and the complete audio of the Floyd Landis
Q&A session at a recent book signing go HERE.