A conspiracy theory?

[Eldron]

Interesting that when Landis tested positive all the testing was conducted at Châtenay-Malabry and there was no possibility of an error!!!

When Mayo tested positive there was a lab error at Châtenay-Malabry so the B sample was tested in Ghent and a second sample tested in Australia.

One can only speculate what the results would have been if Landis was given the same treatment.

 

[Trev_S]

From what I understand Landis could have requested the 'B' samples be tested elsewhere. He and his advisors opted not to.

Part of Landis defence was the inadequacy of the Lab that did the A sample test. Now if his B sample was tested elsewhere and tested positive then the majority of his defence would have gone straight down the toilet.
In other words (in my opinion) they knew the B sample would be positive, so better keep it at the place that they claim made errors and results that can't be trusted.
Thats my take on that scenario at least.


As for Mayo's result, that is why they have a B sample, to double check.
Who's to say his samples weren't sitting right on the border line of the limits. One lab says yep thats dubious and should be listed as such. The next lab says so close but just inside the max limit. ????
I would guess that 'B' samples are tested a lot more thoroughly.


Conspiracy?? highly doubtful only in peoples paranoid minds

 

[Gregers]

Ultimately, the result would have been the same-exogenous testosterone in 5 of his samples. And that is what the pro Landis crowd seem very unwilling to address. They are more interested in imaginary conspiracies than explaining why his wee wee is full of a performance enhancing substance.

Interesting that when Landis tested positive all the testing was conducted at Châtenay-Malabry and there was no possibility of an error!!!

When Mayo tested positive there was a lab error at Châtenay-Malabry so the B sample was tested in Ghent and a second sample tested in Australia.

One can only speculate what the results would have been if Landis was given the same treatment.

 

[limerickman]

Given that Landis testosterone A-sample reading was 400% over the limit, I don't think that a test conducted elsewhere would have found that his B-sample was negative.

I agree with the others here.
Landis strategy was to try to implicate one particular lab and their results/processes.

By allowing his B-sample to be tested elsewhere, and to be found positive, would have totally buried Landis defense.
His strategy allowed him to play "the hard done by" routine for 16 months, and to collect donations from "supporters".

 

[Eldron]

Personally I would have preferred Landis getting tested elsewhere - that would have at least have provided some credibility for the french lab and given conclusive proof of his positive test from more than one source.

I'm neither here nor there about Landis' guilt - I just find it odd that the lab says "we never have errors" then admits to errors.

@Trev_S - I'm not sure it was Landis' choice to only have his samples tested at Châtenay-Malabry - if that is true then it was a seriously poor judgement from Landis. Refusing to have his sample tested elsewhere and then doubting the credibility of the lab that did is not that smart. I seem to remember Landis asking for his sample to be tested elsewhere. Ah well...

This case just never sat well with me. The dodgy lab (yes I do think Châtenay-Malabry is dodge), the poor mathematical ratio (they blamed everything on the numerator being high without checking to see if the denomenator was low), the split verdict in the states, the 13 months it took to come to a conclusion. This case has been everything but clear cut.

It just stinks is all.

 

[limerickman]

Personally I would have preferred Landis getting tested elsewhere - that would have at least have provided some credibility for the french lab and given conclusive proof of his positive test from more than one source.

I'm neither here nor there about Landis' guilt - I just find it odd that the lab says "we never have errors" then admits to errors.

@Trev_S - I'm not sure it was Landis' choice to only have his samples tested at Châtenay-Malabry - if that is true then it was a seriously poor judgement from Landis. Refusing to have his sample tested elsewhere and then doubting the credibility of the lab that did is not that smart. I seem to remember Landis asking for his sample to be tested elsewhere. Ah well...

This case just never sat well with me. The dodgy lab (yes I do think Châtenay-Malabry is dodge), the poor mathematical ratio (they blamed everything on the numerator being high without checking to see if the denomenator was low), the split verdict in the states, the 13 months it took to come to a conclusion. This case has been everything but clear cut.

It just stinks is all.

I read that the Saffers hijacked Jonny's boot last Saturday!!!!!!!!!!

You enjoying the homecoming down there, eld???

 

[Eldron]

If the CAS find Landis innocent then it'll take turn this circus into a freak show.

Will they then have another function celebrating the new, new winner where Oscar P removes the jersey and gives it back to Landis?

Sublime = ridiculous.

 

[Eldron]

I read that the Saffers hijacked Jonny's boot last Saturday!!!!!!!!!!

You enjoying the homecoming down there, eld???

Saturday night/Sunday morning was wild.

From a pink caddilac complete with "Elvis" to a 10 ton truck full of drunkards to a man dressed up in a full springbok costume (the animal not the rugby team) - it was a surreal experience.

I couldn't get to work this morning because of the long queues of people heading towards the airport for the welcome!

It's awesome for the country - everyone celebrated - regardless of colour.

Fantastic!

 

[Leafer]

When Mayo tested positive there was a lab error at Châtenay-Malabry so the B sample was tested in Ghent and a second sample tested in Australia.

You're assuming that there was an error in the A sample - the only source claiming that is the Spanish cycling federation and Mayo himself, not the UCI nor LNDD. That doesn't meant that there wasn't an error in the A, mind you, just that it hasn't been confirmed yet, and personally I don't consider the Spanish cycling fed a very reliable source, as they've been apologizers for their dopers for years.

The B testing was done at Ghent only because LNDD was closed at the time, not because there were questions about the LNDD - in fact, the reason that the B is being re-tested at LNDD following the Ghent inconclusive is because that lab - LNDD - is considered by the UCI to be the most reliable. As for the Australia lab's involvement, EPO B sample tests are often now sent to the originators of the test, who happen to be Australian, for further confirmation, so nothing odd about that.

 

[Frigo's Luggage]

From what I understand Landis could have requested the 'B' samples be tested elsewhere. He and his advisors opted not to.

Part of Landis defence was the inadequacy of the Lab that did the A sample test. Now if his B sample was tested elsewhere and tested positive then the majority of his defence would have gone straight down the toilet.
In other words (in my opinion) they knew the B sample would be positive, so better keep it at the place that they claim made errors and results that can't be trusted.
Thats my take on that scenario at least.


As for Mayo's result, that is why they have a B sample, to double check.
Who's to say his samples weren't sitting right on the border line of the limits. One lab says yep thats dubious and should be listed as such. The next lab says so close but just inside the max limit. ????
I would guess that 'B' samples are tested a lot more thoroughly.


Conspiracy?? highly doubtful only in peoples paranoid minds

I think you are correct about all of this.

I hope people don't point at this case to say it proves the French lab sucks. The epo test is subjective and two different reasonable and proper conclusion could be made on a borderline test.

 

[Eldron]

I think you are correct about all of this.

I hope people don't point at this case to say it proves the French lab sucks. The epo test is subjective and two different reasonable and proper conclusion could be made on a borderline test.

"The UCI said on Tuesday that it does not consider Iban Mayo's doping case to be fully closed and took issue with the Spanish Cycling Federation's announcement that Mayo's B sample had tested negative for EPO. "It wasn't a negative B sample it was an inconclusive B sample," Anne Gripper, UCI anti-doping manager told AP. "The case for us is still very open, we have not gotten a final resolution on the B sample. It needs to be analysed in the Paris laboratory."

Because those Belgians and Australians can't be trusted! One french test obviously means more than two non french tests...

Ok ok this comment was tongue in cheek. Sort of.