This is what sucks about the United States media culture: pure sensationalism. I thought we threw out yellow journalism with the 19th century. No one gave a crap about bike racing (probably the world's most grueling sport) until Americans actually won the Tour de France--most recently Floyd Landis. Gotta have the Big Story. And now the media has already crucified Landis for mere allegations that he is using illegal hormone doping.
Let's set the facts straight: First, the testing. During the TdF, the riders who win the day's stage as well as the overall leader are subject to blood and urine tests within half an hour of the finish of each day's race. This means Landis would've been tested after stages 11, 12, 15-17, 19, 20. Four other competitors selected at random are tested each day as well.
Okay, so Landis gets his blood and urine tested seven times. Six of the seven times, nothing abnormal shows up on the first test or "A" test. Although cycling's governing body, the Union Cycliste International (UCI), does not require positive A tests to be confirmed by a second "B" test, standard laboratory protocol would assume this is necessary to offset any potential testing errors. (Does this say something already about the UCI?)
What Landis' post-stage 17 A test revealed was an "elevated" ratio of testosterone to epitestosterone. Normal people have a T:E ratio of between 1:1 and 2:1. Above 4:1 is considered abnormal, although some people do naturally have ratios in this range. A naturally occurring hormone (a biological "messenger"), testosterone stimulates muscle growth following strenuous efforts. Normally, an athlete would have to use testosterone supplements over a long period of time during training, with recovery afterwards, to reap the benefits. A quick shot of it following stage 16 would've been largely pointless and provided no tangible results one day later. The only evidence to the contrary is that Landis looked downright pissed off at the people crowding around him when he got off his bike after stage 17--a case of 'roid rage, perhaps? And even if, as some erroneously claim, that Landis was drinking tons of water during stage 17 to dilute his blood, doing so only decreases absolute concentrations, not relative concentrations (as concerning the T:E ratio).
The UCI is partners in crime with the World Anti-Doping Administration (WADA). Now it's true that various forms of performance-enhancing doping were rampant within professional cycling and cross-country skiing, and I applaud the UCI's crackdown on it since the "Festina scandal" in 1998. But the UCI has gone so far off the deep end that they've demolished athlete's careers on the basis of mere speculation (case in point: the team Astana riders who were prevented from starting this year's Tour, even though they never conducted any blood tests and were later acquitted). Even at the slighest whisper of fraud, the UCI slaps racing bans of up to four years. This has unduly tarnished cycling's reputation, causing many sponsors to pull out. For example, the Spanish Comunidad Valenciana team has lost its sponsorship post-Tour, and now the struggling athletes are left jobless. This happens all the time.
I find it interesting that TdF runner-up Oscar Pereiro, upon being told he would become the champion of Landis is stripped of his title, said that he doesn't want the title--a mere "academic" championship, he said. With all he has going for him, Pereiro doesn't even trust the UCI's testing!
If tests can prove unquestionably that Landis cheated, then by all means he ought to face the consequences. But the UCI, WADA, and--most of all--the American media need to give athletes the benefit of the doubt and live by the "innocent until proven guilty beyond reasonable doubt" rule. After all, isn't due process part of the Bill of Rights by which we live or die?
As if there weren't enough politically-minded weblogs already, I have now decided to enter the game. (Well, it may only be one post.) But the real impact comes not in my crappy blog, but in last night's unformal commencement of . . .
THE FED PARTY!
As a collective of seven keen-minded twenty-somethings, we are FED UP! (We figure being called the "Fed Up" Party wouldn't give us as much cred'.) We hereby propose two initial changes:
Repeal/reduce property taxes. Joe and Janet Yankee have lived in their modest two-story home for forty-one years, having finished mortgage payments eleven years ago. According to their deed and the bank, their home is paid off and is theirs. But should they miss a few property tax payments, the government is now the proud owner of the Yankee homestead. Wait a sec, didnt' I already finish paying for my house? Apparently no one can actually own anything in America. I mean, the reason I can't pay my property taxes is because Social Security ran out! Granted, it is a good thing to have the mortgage and property tax allowances on ye olde 1040, but something's amiss here. We are somewhat agreed upon seeking the offsetting revenue in luxury taxes or an increase in income tax. (Don't get me started on eminent domain.)
Establish runoff balloting. No, this does not mean that we steal all the ballots, run off with them, and cast all the votes in our favor. Runoff balloting has been promoted by those sometimes-genius folk in the Green Party as a way to give a third (or other) party greater clout. Although varying formats have been proposed, here's the gist: Voters are allowed to cast votes for not only one, but two or more candidates (perhaps rank-ordering them), and the winner is declared on the basis of greatest overall approval by the voting public.
Given the artifically and unnecessarily polarized platforms of the current incarnations of the Democratic and Republican Parties, let's say 50% of the public votes Democratic but, loathing the Republicans, votes for the Green Party candidate as a second choice. The other 50% votes Republican and hates the Democrats, so they also vote Green with their second choice. The result: the Green Party gains the highest overall approval, landing its candidate in the Oval Office. The Asses and Elephants can no longer target select voter groups like the Religious Wrong, but must consider what would gain the widest approval by all voter groups.
Let's face it: the Democrats and the Republicans are both off their respective rockers right now: no honest person considering all sides of any given issue can be as bigoted and polarized as either party. While I sit around vainly wishing for Lieberman-McCain duel in '08, I know that's not going to happen (heaven forbid that progressive moderates would actually be selected by their parties!). Is anyone else FED Up?
The champions of the closest TdF in years, from left to right:
2nd place, Oscar Pereiro (Caisse d'Epargne), Spain
1st place, Floyd Landis (Phonak), USA
3rd place, Andreas Klöden (T-Mobile), Germany
Thanks for the thrills.
By now everyone in the cycling world (and all you futbol bandwagon wannabees had better pay attention: the Tour de France is the world's largest spectator sport, not the World Cup) knows how Floyd Landis roared back into contention on stage 17. According to Patrick O'Grady of VeloNews he "chased down an 11-man breakaway, killed and ate them, built a new bicycle out of their bones, and roared away in a pillar of fire to win the stage to Morzine and jump back to within 30 seconds of the yellow jersey."
Apparently the secret to Floyd Landis' success on stage 17 of the Tour de France was due to . . . beer. I can hear the cyclists of the world applauding. Maybe this is why Belgium churns out both amazing ales and grizzled cyclists. After actually pedaling so slowly that he rode backwards on the final climb of stage 16 (well, almost: he lost a minute per kilometer), Landis was asked, "How do you deal with this from a mental standpoint?"
"I don't know. Drink some beer? That's what I'm thinking about now."
Landis drank tons of water on his epic ride. Aside from the temps in the 90s, was there any other reason? "Maybe it was the beer I had last night," he admitted. I can see the made-for-TV movies now: "The making of a true American hero: Raised in an oppressive Mennonite family and forbidden to wear shorts, Landis broke free of his restraints, moved to California, became a pro mountain bike racer, and even shaved his legs. Now, like a bubbly head of foam, he has risen to the top of the cycling world, owing it all to beer."
On one last note (sorry), maybe the Germans have had it right all along (no surprise there). The inspiration for many of today's citrus-tweaked wheat ales, the German Radlermass, or"cyclist mug", is a carbohydrate-rich mix of beer and lemonade, ready to replenish the weary rider.
In the immortal words of LL Cool J, "Don't call it a comeback!"--it's more like resurrection! After riding a strong but conservative Tour de France so far and holding the maillot jaune, the yellow jersey designating the overall leader, American Floyd Landis (Phonak) simply blew up on the final climb of stage 16 yesterday, losing nine minutes on the day to his nearest rival, Carlos Sastre (CSC). This dropped him to 11th place, 8:08 arears of Oscar Pereiro (Caisse d'Epargne). "Now it's Landis whose name is scratched off the contenders' list," writes VeloNews.com. "His dreams of winning this Tour de France [are] completely shattered."
But today was a new day. Long-time cycling commentators Phil Liggett and Paul Sherwen call it the greatest single day of bike racing they've seen in 35 years as professionals. Let's face it: the Tour was boring with Lance; with a team stacked like the 1927 Yankees, there was no question who would win; the only question was: by how much? And Landis provided the excitement today in the most wide-open Tour in a decade.
Starting 50 km into the first of the day's four major climbs in the Alps, a Categorie 1 (5 being the least difficult, 1 the most difficult), Landis and his Phonak boys cranked up the tempo, splitting the pack. Landis then took off on his own, bridging to the eleven-man breakaway group and catching them on the second mountain, a Categorie 2. Continuing to hammer away, he dropped all but a few on the day's third mountain pass, another Categorie 1.
On the the fourth and final major climb, the viscious Hors-Categorie (so difficult it is beyond categorization) Col de Joux-Plane, where legends are made and hopes are dashed, Landis rode away for good, coming over the top 5:08 ahead of Sastre. Landis then gained another 30 seconds on the dangerous, winding descent to the finish, giving him his first-ever Tour de France stage win and catapulting him from a hopeless eleventh to third place overall, only 30 seconds behind Pereiro, who holds the maillot jaune.
Saturday's 57km time trial (a solo race against the clock) should decide it all. Landis, having finished second in the first time trial, is the odds-on favorite to win. Can the scrappy Pennsylvanian do it?
Okay, so you probably know that I'm one heck of a crazy person: I'm in the midst of raising $31K (again) to continue bringing the amazing news of God's grace in Jesus Christ to students in the Near East. And, as you can expect, most of my time is spent floundering in doubt: Will the money come in? Why can't I get a hold of anybody? Am I really supposed to be going back there again instead of looking for a teaching job? Do I actually even care about the gospel myself, let alone reaching others with it, blah, blah, blah. But the other night I read something that is keeping my feet on the ground and some sense in my head:
Christian discipleship is a process of paying more and more attention to God's righteousness [his unswerving fidelity in relationship] and less and less attention to our own; finding the meaning of our lives not by probing our moods and motives and morals but by believing in God's will and purposes; making a map of the faithfulness of God, not charting the rise and fall of our affections.*
I began to wonder: How much of my doubt and waffling is on account of looking to my subjective emotions and perceptions about my supposed "calling" to go back overseas rather than looking to those sureties grounded in God's unassailable plan for the world's peoples? I know for an overwhelming fact that unless God revokes his covenant with Abraham (Genesis 12:2-3; Galatians 3:6-9) and scorns the blood of his own beloved Son (Revelation 5:9-10)--thus bringing his own self-condemnation (Genesis 15:7-10, 17)--he will act to bring the nations to Christ. And this will not occur without preachers of the gospel (Romans 10:14-17).
Now this is not to say that my role is assured on account of this. But Jesus himself gave the imperative to pray for harvesters (Matthew 9:37-38), so every prayer to that end is as if Christ himself were petitioning the Lord of the harvest. Surely his prayers are not met in vain! While I can't make a definite claim either way, it seems to me that our odds for success are far better when we trust in God's firm purposes to guide our lives, instead of relying on "gut feeling" or "probing our moods and motives and morals." So I keep on keepin' on.
______________________________________
*Eugene H. Peterson, A Long Obedience in the Same Direction, 2nd ed. (Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity, 2000), 133.
