With all the talk about Floyd Landis (much of which has been incredibly poorly distilled through the various media outlets attempting to cover the story) I think we as a sports/cycling community missed an opportunity to discuss what I think will prove to be a more difficult issue in the long run regarding the treatment of doping in the realm of professional athletics. For those tired of hearing me rant about cycling, I assure you that, while cycling provides the story for this entry, any sports fan will be able to relate to the subject matter.
What we all missed was that, while Floyd was being drawn and quartered (an aptly old-school punishment for a Mennonite) the "Astana 5" were all cleared of any and all allegations against them.
The quick back story: on the day prior to the start of the Tour de France, a list of 28 riders suspected of doping was released by the Spanish press. 9 of these riders were scheduled to start Le Tour the next day, 5 from the Astana-Wurth team. All 9 riders were pulled from their team lineups, per the Code of Ethics. Since this left the Astana squad with only 4 riders, 2 shy of the minimum 6, the team was disqualified and not able to start the race, including pre-race favorite Alexandre Vinokourov, who was not one of the riders in question.
The "Acquital" of the 5 riders involved opens two important questions related to doping in sports: first, where do we draw the line between "innocent until proven guilty" and
"reasonable suspicion" in the sports arena? (in other words, was the UCI right in eliminating the squad on the suspicion of guilt?) and second, now that the Astana team has the legal opportunity to sue for damages related to missing the Tour de France, should they?
My personal response to each of these questions runs directly counter to the collective American consensus, as I generally understand it. Both answers also relate to the general concept of what is "good for the sport."
To the first I say that the UCI was absolutely correct in their response to the allegations. Cycling is a sport that has been fighting the doping scandal since long before Barry Bonds first used the Cream and the Clear, and Jose Canseco became "famous" in tabloid tell-all circles. The Operacion Puerto investigation that the suspensions stemmed from promised to uncover the largest, and hopefully last, major doping ring in the sport. The UCI did what they had to do, for the good of the Tour and for the good of the sport. But to do that, they had to ask themselves what was worse, the possibility of suspending an innocent rider from the biggest race of the year, or allowing a guilty rider to race, and answer the questions later.
In suspending these riders, the UCI made a clear and powerful statement: "DO NOT associate with dopers." Whether actually guilty, or only guilty by association, these riders were "involved" in a scandal that threatened to rock the foundation of the sport. Cycling could no longer bear the weight of the cloud of suspicion (which had apparently itself taken performance enhancers).
To the second question-should the Astana team sue the UCI and the Tour?-I again say, in the best interest of the sport, no. If Astana sues the UCI, they would almost certainly win (at least by the standards of US courts). But what damage does one team's victory have on the sport? The UCI finds itself in a position where it can no longer afford to suspend riders on suspicion alone, no matter how strong the evidence. Next time, when a rider is truly guilty and isn't suspended, the UCI, cycling, and sports fans all lose. I don't envy the Astana riders for what they were put through, but I would beg them, for the sake of the sport, don't sue.
I'd love responses to this post and your thoughts on the questions posted here. I think it provides an interesting opportunity for dialogue both topically related to sports and doping, but also philosophically, in questioning how to govern in consideration of the "greater good" versus "individual liberties." I look forward to your responses.
Monday, July 31, 2006
Thursday, July 27, 2006
Foot in mouth?...not quite
Is now the appropriate time for me to put my foot in my mouth, retract my previous post, and ride off into the night with my tail between my legs? In light of recent news that Floyd Landis has tested positive "for testosterone," the knee jerk reaction here is, yes. In a sport overwhelmed by doping scandal, we have reached the point where suspicion is sufficient to condemn.
So I'm not doing it. I'm backing Floyd. All the way. I'm saying it here in my blog, with four of you as my witness. Vive Le Floyd.
How? Why? W.T.F?
Good questions. We'll get to the answer, but first let's explain the case against Floyd (to the best of my knowledge at this point). Let's start with a myth: Floyd tested positive for testosterone. Fact: The evidence against Floyd is an "unusual" ratio of testosterone to epitestosterone (T/E ratio), both naturally produced by the body. The average T/E ratio for males is about 1:1, though a ratio of 2 or 3:1 is well within normal limits. To say that Floyd tested positive for testosterone is a complete fallacy. In fact, the actual levels of testosterone and epitestosterone in Floyd's sample were LOW compared to "normal" results. What triggered that positive was the ratio.
So what's the ratio that triggers an "Adverse Analytical Finding" (AAF - in the parlance of Anti-Doping culture)? Well, until 2005, a 6:1 ratio was the trigger point for a positive result. This ratio was often challenged while it stood, and often athletes won arbitration cases over the 6:1 detection limit. One Swedish study I found tested nearly 9000 individuals. Of these, 28 (about 0.3%) triggered positive results at a 6:1 detection level. However, after further work the team "concluded that among the above 28 cases, only one can be regarded as a clear case of testosterone doping. Although the vast majority of Swedish athletes have urinary T/E ratios below six, there is a subfraction with a constant higher ratio, possibly due to genetic factors."
So what happened in 2005? Well clearly, WADA did the only thing they could do in light of such evidence that the test really doesn't work all that well...they lowered the ratio. Now, the trigger point for an AAF is a 4:1 ratio. You thought we created false negatives before, wait till you see what we do now!! Of course, WADA and sports' respective governing bodies have claimed that lowering the ratio limit has allowed them to catch more cheaters. Guess what, guys? You catch more good guys too. That's what lowering the limit does.
So we trigger a positive result, tipping the scales at just over the 4:1 limit...what now? Well, we do more testing, of course. Or we don't. Seriously. We either perform Isotope Ratio Mass Spectometry (IRMS) which kinda sorta helps a little in maybe showing if the testosterone came from the body or not... or we don't. You may ask, "Well, how do you decide whether or not to do the test?" Simple really, if we're capable of doing the test, we do it. If we're not capable of doing the test, we don't. Admittedly, it's not very scientific, but it sure does make life easier.
I'll stop the explanation there, because I don't know whether IRMS was performed, nor do I know what it revealed assuming it was performed. So I'll stop.
So what now? Well, first Floyd gets his 'B' sample tested by an independent lab to either confirm or disprove the results of the original test. If the 'B' sample comes up positive, which is likely since it came from the same cup of piss, then Floyd is suspended and he gets to appeal to the Court of Arbitration for Sports (CAS, or TAS if you're French, and I sincerely hope you're not). At this point, based on the history of appeals related to this test, he has very very good chance of his appeal being granted and the sport of cycling issuing a collective, "my bad."
So, there's my defense. We'll see how it holds up. The good news is I'm not alone. It seems that in a cycling community that lately has jumped on every accused, suspected, or rumored doper, there is a surprising amount of support for Floyd. Jonathan Vaughters, the manager of the TIAA-CREF Us Pro team, on Velonews.com:
I believe Floyd is innocent. The majority of T/E tests are over-turned at the CAS level. The guy will probably be proven innocent in eight months time, but in the short-term, the media is killing him. Floyd is basically paying for the sins of all the morons who came before him, who have denied, denied, denied. He's going to take the fall for everyone who has cried wolf before him. He's going to be the guy who gets his head cut off and that's a real tragedy.
From Dirk Demol, director of Team Discovery:
I cannot truly believe that Landis positive. I never imagined anything behind his exploit (to Morzine). As an ex-pro, I know you can have a good day after a bad day and the legs can come back and succeed again. Be careful. The counter-analysis is not yet positive and we shouldn't draw too fast of a conclusion.
Of course, suspicion, surprise, frustration, and doubt rule the day. We live in a guilty until proven innocent era in sporting history, where the shadow of doubt is strong than the light of truth. But we do make mistakes. Just days ago, 5 riders from the Astana-Wurth squad who were disqualified from the Tour de France in the midst of the Operacion Puerta doping scandal were all cleared of any wrong doing. They'll never get their race back, and that's a damn shame, but a necessary product of the sporting environment in which we currently find ourselves. I don't blame the UCI for their suspensions, and even in hindsight, I support that decision. It was done for the good of the race, and for the good of the sport. But we do make mistakes. And only time will tell if Floyd is innocent or guilty. But until I have proof of guilt, I'm standing by his innocence.
So I'm not doing it. I'm backing Floyd. All the way. I'm saying it here in my blog, with four of you as my witness. Vive Le Floyd.
How? Why? W.T.F?
Good questions. We'll get to the answer, but first let's explain the case against Floyd (to the best of my knowledge at this point). Let's start with a myth: Floyd tested positive for testosterone. Fact: The evidence against Floyd is an "unusual" ratio of testosterone to epitestosterone (T/E ratio), both naturally produced by the body. The average T/E ratio for males is about 1:1, though a ratio of 2 or 3:1 is well within normal limits. To say that Floyd tested positive for testosterone is a complete fallacy. In fact, the actual levels of testosterone and epitestosterone in Floyd's sample were LOW compared to "normal" results. What triggered that positive was the ratio.
So what's the ratio that triggers an "Adverse Analytical Finding" (AAF - in the parlance of Anti-Doping culture)? Well, until 2005, a 6:1 ratio was the trigger point for a positive result. This ratio was often challenged while it stood, and often athletes won arbitration cases over the 6:1 detection limit. One Swedish study I found tested nearly 9000 individuals. Of these, 28 (about 0.3%) triggered positive results at a 6:1 detection level. However, after further work the team "concluded that among the above 28 cases, only one can be regarded as a clear case of testosterone doping. Although the vast majority of Swedish athletes have urinary T/E ratios below six, there is a subfraction with a constant higher ratio, possibly due to genetic factors."
So what happened in 2005? Well clearly, WADA did the only thing they could do in light of such evidence that the test really doesn't work all that well...they lowered the ratio. Now, the trigger point for an AAF is a 4:1 ratio. You thought we created false negatives before, wait till you see what we do now!! Of course, WADA and sports' respective governing bodies have claimed that lowering the ratio limit has allowed them to catch more cheaters. Guess what, guys? You catch more good guys too. That's what lowering the limit does.
So we trigger a positive result, tipping the scales at just over the 4:1 limit...what now? Well, we do more testing, of course. Or we don't. Seriously. We either perform Isotope Ratio Mass Spectometry (IRMS) which kinda sorta helps a little in maybe showing if the testosterone came from the body or not... or we don't. You may ask, "Well, how do you decide whether or not to do the test?" Simple really, if we're capable of doing the test, we do it. If we're not capable of doing the test, we don't. Admittedly, it's not very scientific, but it sure does make life easier.
I'll stop the explanation there, because I don't know whether IRMS was performed, nor do I know what it revealed assuming it was performed. So I'll stop.
So what now? Well, first Floyd gets his 'B' sample tested by an independent lab to either confirm or disprove the results of the original test. If the 'B' sample comes up positive, which is likely since it came from the same cup of piss, then Floyd is suspended and he gets to appeal to the Court of Arbitration for Sports (CAS, or TAS if you're French, and I sincerely hope you're not). At this point, based on the history of appeals related to this test, he has very very good chance of his appeal being granted and the sport of cycling issuing a collective, "my bad."
So, there's my defense. We'll see how it holds up. The good news is I'm not alone. It seems that in a cycling community that lately has jumped on every accused, suspected, or rumored doper, there is a surprising amount of support for Floyd. Jonathan Vaughters, the manager of the TIAA-CREF Us Pro team, on Velonews.com:
I believe Floyd is innocent. The majority of T/E tests are over-turned at the CAS level. The guy will probably be proven innocent in eight months time, but in the short-term, the media is killing him. Floyd is basically paying for the sins of all the morons who came before him, who have denied, denied, denied. He's going to take the fall for everyone who has cried wolf before him. He's going to be the guy who gets his head cut off and that's a real tragedy.
From Dirk Demol, director of Team Discovery:
I cannot truly believe that Landis positive. I never imagined anything behind his exploit (to Morzine). As an ex-pro, I know you can have a good day after a bad day and the legs can come back and succeed again. Be careful. The counter-analysis is not yet positive and we shouldn't draw too fast of a conclusion.
Of course, suspicion, surprise, frustration, and doubt rule the day. We live in a guilty until proven innocent era in sporting history, where the shadow of doubt is strong than the light of truth. But we do make mistakes. Just days ago, 5 riders from the Astana-Wurth squad who were disqualified from the Tour de France in the midst of the Operacion Puerta doping scandal were all cleared of any wrong doing. They'll never get their race back, and that's a damn shame, but a necessary product of the sporting environment in which we currently find ourselves. I don't blame the UCI for their suspensions, and even in hindsight, I support that decision. It was done for the good of the race, and for the good of the sport. But we do make mistakes. And only time will tell if Floyd is innocent or guilty. But until I have proof of guilt, I'm standing by his innocence.
Monday, July 24, 2006
Back on my 2-wheeled high horse
...or "Celebrating Landismas" for the cycling anointed.
For those who have heard my complaints/ramblings/pleas/explanations/diatribes/other- descriptive-noun-for-long-drawn-out-discourse, yes, this post is absolutely intended to serve as a plug for my favorite Euro-sport, professional cycling.
The 2006 edition of the Tour de France is over, which means 99% of Americans won't have any recollection of who Floyd Landis is, or what he has accomplished, or why we should care in about 3 weeks; which should, oddly enough, be right around the time that Floyd goes under the knife to replace his dying hip. Read that last part again.
A brief review of history for those who may not be completely up to speed. Yesterday, Floyd Landis, a Mennonite from rural Pennsylvania (think barn-raisin', goat-grazin', busted-hip-not-phasin') became the third American in history to win the world's greatest bike race. Numbers like that perpetuate the myth that cycling is not an American sport. Third ever...in the 100+ year history of Le Tour...not really our thing I guess.
Guess again. 3 is an amazing number when you consider that Greg LeMond was the first American to do it, just 20 years ago in 1986. (Note: another thing LeMond was first at was using those funny little aero-bars for time trials and doing the wind tunnel testing that Lance Armstrong made famous - because, damnit, when we do something, we damnwell do it right.) In the 21 editions of Le Tour since LeMond's breakthrough victory, the 3 American champs have totalled 11 wins. 11. In 21 years. Not too shabby.
(As an aside: believe it or not, America, there was a time when cycling was more popular than baseball, basketball, and football combined...of course, that's mainly because the three markedly American sports had not yet been invented, but what's a few hundred years of history between friends?)
Ok, back to Floyd. His performance this year has been billed as the greatest championship performance in the modern history of the sport. What Landis did on Thursday, erasing all but :30 seconds of an 8:08 deficit on a single, balls-to-the-wall, brutally calculating, and savagely dominating performance, over a sinlge day in the Alps, may in fact be the greatest performance in a generation, not just in cycling, but in all of sports.
How can I possibly make that claim? Let's break it down.
1. Landis did it alone. Nobody followed. Nobody helped. Nobody could. In professional cycling, a solo break is a suicide mission. They don't succeed. Not for 150 km. Consider this: drafting in the peloton requires the riders in the pack to expend as much as 40% less energy than a solo rider will use.
2. He did it following one of the most devestating bonks in recent memory, on a climb that once bonked no less that the great Lance himself. A quick summary of Floyd's power numbers for his attack: One the first climb of the day, he averaged 340 watts as he rode away from the entire peloton, with no one able to hold his wheel. On an average day, this is a typical number for most riders in the peloton, but after two next-to-impossible days in the Alps, it's quite the output. On the next climb, as Landis closed the 10 minute gap to the day's earlier breakaway of 11 riders, he averaged an uber-climber 370 watts. But Floyd wasn't finished. On the 3rd major climb of the day, Floyd stretched his lead on the peloton from just over 4 minutes, to more than 8 minutes. His average output for this push: an incredible-by-any-standard, 390 watts! What does that number mean? Let's make a comparison to Landis himself the day before. During his "bonk" up La Toussuire, Landis averaged a meager 260 watt average. On a flat road this translates to about 19-20 miles per hour...a ride well within even my range (albeit not at the end of the stage they had just completed). So the very next day, Floyd upped his wattage by 50%. That 390 watt value?...about what Floyd would do for a 50 km time-trial. Not so much after 100 km solo attack in brutal heat with a chasing peloton on the third consecutive alpine stage. Unreal. Period.
3. He was being chased. Floyd Landis is a dangerous rider. He is a rider no one wanted to let back into the race. All day long the teams of Oscar Periero, Carlos Sastre, and Andreas Kloden chased and chased and chased as hard as they could to pull Floyd back. And with no less than 20 riders busting-tail to bring him back, he kept gaining ground. He was not only stronger than everyone in the pack, he was stronger than the entire pack. In a sport where synergy in the name of the game, where teams rule and the pack is relentless, Floyd took them all on.
4. They all knew it was coming. Word on the pave is that the entire peloton knew Floyd was planning to attack, and they were all scared. Allegedly, a number of riders road alongside Floyd at the early part of the stage, and literally begged him not to attack. They couldn't defend and they knew it. To the beggars, Floyd only threw the barest crumb, " Go drink some Coke, cause we're leaving on the first climb if you want to come."
5. He did it without any significant support from his team. In a race that we Americans have grown used to seeing dominated by the blue-train of the Postal Service/Discovery Channel Team, Landis' Phonak team was suspect at best, and dismally unable to protect their leader at worst. Make no bones about it. This is a team sport. The riders who earned the podium alongside Landis, and the next few who just missed, all had incredibly strong teams. Floyd didn't. Period. He won this race on his own.
6. Did I mention his hip? On good days he can barely walk. On bad days, he's lucky to get out of bed. And he just won the most grueling endurance event on the planet. His hip is dying. After a crash three years ago, he had 3 pins inserted into the desimated bone that remained. The bone never recovered. One leg is an inch shorted than the other from the surgeries. THe bone in that leg has slowly worn away all the cartiledge that cushions the joint. All that's left is a jagged bone, literally pins and needles, tearing away at the bone on the other end of the socket. There's no easy days, only one's where the pain is marginally less unbearable.
He plans to have the hip replaced within a month and says he'll defend his Tour title next year. The surgery he'll have is the same one the Bo Jackson had 15 years ago. Yes, the medicine is better now, and the procedure much safer, but Bo was no slouch, and the surgery eventually spelled the end of his career. Now Floyd, well known as the toughest SOB in the professional peloton says he'll be back from the surgery, with a new hip to defend next year. You know what? I have no doubt he'll do it.
Floyd Landis isn't going anywhere, and neither is American cycling. We're here to stay. This is a beautiful sport rich in tradition, history, and honor. And for anyone who says it's not a tough sport, ask Floyd.
For those who have heard my complaints/ramblings/pleas/explanations/diatribes/other- descriptive-noun-for-long-drawn-out-discourse, yes, this post is absolutely intended to serve as a plug for my favorite Euro-sport, professional cycling.
The 2006 edition of the Tour de France is over, which means 99% of Americans won't have any recollection of who Floyd Landis is, or what he has accomplished, or why we should care in about 3 weeks; which should, oddly enough, be right around the time that Floyd goes under the knife to replace his dying hip. Read that last part again.
A brief review of history for those who may not be completely up to speed. Yesterday, Floyd Landis, a Mennonite from rural Pennsylvania (think barn-raisin', goat-grazin', busted-hip-not-phasin') became the third American in history to win the world's greatest bike race. Numbers like that perpetuate the myth that cycling is not an American sport. Third ever...in the 100+ year history of Le Tour...not really our thing I guess.
Guess again. 3 is an amazing number when you consider that Greg LeMond was the first American to do it, just 20 years ago in 1986. (Note: another thing LeMond was first at was using those funny little aero-bars for time trials and doing the wind tunnel testing that Lance Armstrong made famous - because, damnit, when we do something, we damnwell do it right.) In the 21 editions of Le Tour since LeMond's breakthrough victory, the 3 American champs have totalled 11 wins. 11. In 21 years. Not too shabby.
(As an aside: believe it or not, America, there was a time when cycling was more popular than baseball, basketball, and football combined...of course, that's mainly because the three markedly American sports had not yet been invented, but what's a few hundred years of history between friends?)
Ok, back to Floyd. His performance this year has been billed as the greatest championship performance in the modern history of the sport. What Landis did on Thursday, erasing all but :30 seconds of an 8:08 deficit on a single, balls-to-the-wall, brutally calculating, and savagely dominating performance, over a sinlge day in the Alps, may in fact be the greatest performance in a generation, not just in cycling, but in all of sports.
How can I possibly make that claim? Let's break it down.
1. Landis did it alone. Nobody followed. Nobody helped. Nobody could. In professional cycling, a solo break is a suicide mission. They don't succeed. Not for 150 km. Consider this: drafting in the peloton requires the riders in the pack to expend as much as 40% less energy than a solo rider will use.
2. He did it following one of the most devestating bonks in recent memory, on a climb that once bonked no less that the great Lance himself. A quick summary of Floyd's power numbers for his attack: One the first climb of the day, he averaged 340 watts as he rode away from the entire peloton, with no one able to hold his wheel. On an average day, this is a typical number for most riders in the peloton, but after two next-to-impossible days in the Alps, it's quite the output. On the next climb, as Landis closed the 10 minute gap to the day's earlier breakaway of 11 riders, he averaged an uber-climber 370 watts. But Floyd wasn't finished. On the 3rd major climb of the day, Floyd stretched his lead on the peloton from just over 4 minutes, to more than 8 minutes. His average output for this push: an incredible-by-any-standard, 390 watts! What does that number mean? Let's make a comparison to Landis himself the day before. During his "bonk" up La Toussuire, Landis averaged a meager 260 watt average. On a flat road this translates to about 19-20 miles per hour...a ride well within even my range (albeit not at the end of the stage they had just completed). So the very next day, Floyd upped his wattage by 50%. That 390 watt value?...about what Floyd would do for a 50 km time-trial. Not so much after 100 km solo attack in brutal heat with a chasing peloton on the third consecutive alpine stage. Unreal. Period.
3. He was being chased. Floyd Landis is a dangerous rider. He is a rider no one wanted to let back into the race. All day long the teams of Oscar Periero, Carlos Sastre, and Andreas Kloden chased and chased and chased as hard as they could to pull Floyd back. And with no less than 20 riders busting-tail to bring him back, he kept gaining ground. He was not only stronger than everyone in the pack, he was stronger than the entire pack. In a sport where synergy in the name of the game, where teams rule and the pack is relentless, Floyd took them all on.
4. They all knew it was coming. Word on the pave is that the entire peloton knew Floyd was planning to attack, and they were all scared. Allegedly, a number of riders road alongside Floyd at the early part of the stage, and literally begged him not to attack. They couldn't defend and they knew it. To the beggars, Floyd only threw the barest crumb, " Go drink some Coke, cause we're leaving on the first climb if you want to come."
5. He did it without any significant support from his team. In a race that we Americans have grown used to seeing dominated by the blue-train of the Postal Service/Discovery Channel Team, Landis' Phonak team was suspect at best, and dismally unable to protect their leader at worst. Make no bones about it. This is a team sport. The riders who earned the podium alongside Landis, and the next few who just missed, all had incredibly strong teams. Floyd didn't. Period. He won this race on his own.
6. Did I mention his hip? On good days he can barely walk. On bad days, he's lucky to get out of bed. And he just won the most grueling endurance event on the planet. His hip is dying. After a crash three years ago, he had 3 pins inserted into the desimated bone that remained. The bone never recovered. One leg is an inch shorted than the other from the surgeries. THe bone in that leg has slowly worn away all the cartiledge that cushions the joint. All that's left is a jagged bone, literally pins and needles, tearing away at the bone on the other end of the socket. There's no easy days, only one's where the pain is marginally less unbearable.
He plans to have the hip replaced within a month and says he'll defend his Tour title next year. The surgery he'll have is the same one the Bo Jackson had 15 years ago. Yes, the medicine is better now, and the procedure much safer, but Bo was no slouch, and the surgery eventually spelled the end of his career. Now Floyd, well known as the toughest SOB in the professional peloton says he'll be back from the surgery, with a new hip to defend next year. You know what? I have no doubt he'll do it.
Floyd Landis isn't going anywhere, and neither is American cycling. We're here to stay. This is a beautiful sport rich in tradition, history, and honor. And for anyone who says it's not a tough sport, ask Floyd.
Saturday, July 15, 2006
WOW it's been a while...
It's been so long that I've practically forgotten that this whole blogging adventure even existed. So long in fact that the thought of catching up to speed on my life since the end of Lent is more than overwhelming...it borders on impossible.
So, where do I start? Probably right where I left off. As most of you probably know, I'm living in wonderful Aiken, SC for the summer...in the middle of suburban hell, only without any "urbia" to be a suburbia of. I'm working for Milliken in Barnwell, SC - the "Gateway to the Low Country" as the town self-describes. It has been, well, interesting.
This summer has been nothing short of an awakening. At times, I've been overwhelmed by the sense of loneliness that I feel down here. I'm learning very quickly what it means to be a Marylander. I've long known that to my "Yankee" friends from the north, we are considered southerners; now I find out just how much of a Yankee I really am. If this is what it means to be "Southern" then I am riding on the roof of that bus at best. So I find myself in the middle, like Switzerland; not northern enough to be a Yankee, or Southern enough to have any desire to "rise again."
I've found that my bike is my refuge. I owe a great debt to the folks I met in Seattle a few years ago, not only for my bike itself, but for giving me my first taste of cycling culture. I have since become a fanatic. From my own personal riding and training, to following the pro peloton online (standard cable in Aiken doesn't carry OLN, so my dreams of Tour fanaticism are currently set on simmer) cycling has become an outlet for me as exercise, competitive outlet, and mental escape.
So that's life outside of work. Inside work, the story is somewhat similar. The job is proving a valuable experience, not to mention a test of my patience and personal fortitude on a daily basis. It would be a gross understatement to say it's not what I had expected, but it has given me numerous insights into my future aspirations. Primarily, I'm focused more than ever on product development and marketing, because I find that the manufacturing environment is not one that I personally thrive in. I could say more, but I'll save it for another time.
I don't mean to sound overly negative about this summer, because I don't look at it in that way. I've merely found out how possible it is to feel like a stranger in your own country; which is a truly remarkable realization. I think I'll leave it at that for now, as this entry is scattered enough in theme and mood to confuse even those who know me best. Any of the topics I've covered here could (and well may) be a topic for an entry entry of its own.
Till next time, take care and God bless.
So, where do I start? Probably right where I left off. As most of you probably know, I'm living in wonderful Aiken, SC for the summer...in the middle of suburban hell, only without any "urbia" to be a suburbia of. I'm working for Milliken in Barnwell, SC - the "Gateway to the Low Country" as the town self-describes. It has been, well, interesting.
This summer has been nothing short of an awakening. At times, I've been overwhelmed by the sense of loneliness that I feel down here. I'm learning very quickly what it means to be a Marylander. I've long known that to my "Yankee" friends from the north, we are considered southerners; now I find out just how much of a Yankee I really am. If this is what it means to be "Southern" then I am riding on the roof of that bus at best. So I find myself in the middle, like Switzerland; not northern enough to be a Yankee, or Southern enough to have any desire to "rise again."
I've found that my bike is my refuge. I owe a great debt to the folks I met in Seattle a few years ago, not only for my bike itself, but for giving me my first taste of cycling culture. I have since become a fanatic. From my own personal riding and training, to following the pro peloton online (standard cable in Aiken doesn't carry OLN, so my dreams of Tour fanaticism are currently set on simmer) cycling has become an outlet for me as exercise, competitive outlet, and mental escape.
So that's life outside of work. Inside work, the story is somewhat similar. The job is proving a valuable experience, not to mention a test of my patience and personal fortitude on a daily basis. It would be a gross understatement to say it's not what I had expected, but it has given me numerous insights into my future aspirations. Primarily, I'm focused more than ever on product development and marketing, because I find that the manufacturing environment is not one that I personally thrive in. I could say more, but I'll save it for another time.
I don't mean to sound overly negative about this summer, because I don't look at it in that way. I've merely found out how possible it is to feel like a stranger in your own country; which is a truly remarkable realization. I think I'll leave it at that for now, as this entry is scattered enough in theme and mood to confuse even those who know me best. Any of the topics I've covered here could (and well may) be a topic for an entry entry of its own.
Till next time, take care and God bless.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)