Lab admits to "errors" but still says Landis is in the doghouse...

Discussion in 'Professional Cycling' started by whiteboytrash, Nov 15, 2006.

  1. whiteboytrash

    whiteboytrash New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2005
    Messages:
    5,402
    Likes Received:
    0
    Tour de France winner Floyd Landis's efforts to clear his name got a small boost Wednesday when officials at France's national anti-doping laboratory admitted making an "insignificant" numbering error on a urine sample that later tested positive for testosterone.

    However the director of the IOC-accredited laboratory at Ch√Ętenay-Malabry said the "typing error" had no bearing on the finding of unusual testosterone/epitestosterone ratios in both A and B samples taken after Landis's epic victory in Stage 17 of the Tour.

    Since learning of the positive test Landis has consistently maintained his innocence in the affair and is basing his defense ahead of an anticipated ban from the sport on what he believes are errors on the part of the French lab.

    On Wednesday the laboratory conceded that a labeling error had been made.

    The French newspaper Le Monde reported Wednesday that the B sample had "ill-advisedly been indexed with the wrong number on the accompanying report."

    "The identification number of Floyd Landis was 995 474 while on the report it was listed as 994 474. That doesn't signify that the B sample did not belong to the American. But it will be seized upon by his lawyers who will try to bring new elements to his (defense) case at a presentation on Friday."

    Landis and attorney Howard Jacobs have raised the numbering issue in the past but laboratory director Jacques de Ceaurriz had not commented on the discrepancy until now.

    "It's an error as regards numbering, a typing error which has no significance whatsoever on the findings in the samples," said de Ceaurriz, adding that the World Anti Doping Agency (WADA) was aware of the incident. "These little mistakes happen. They are corrected, and noted."

    "It wouldn't surprise me that Landis's lawyers use this information," De Ceaurriz added, "but the error does not wipe out the result of the analysis."

    On Tuesday an inquiry was launched after hackers pirated the computer system at the French laboratory.

    De Ceaurriz confirmed to AFP that an investigation was under way after the discovery that the lab's computer system had been accessed from outside.

    "An inquiry is under way. I'm not making any comment because the incident is probably linked to affairs currently being handled by the laboratory," de Ceaurriz told AFP. "We have been aware of this for some time and in the past week our suspicions have been confirmed."

    According to French sports daily L'Equipe, police have identified an alleged suspect based on e-mails and letters sent by the individual, who is reported to be close to Landis, in which he cited internal documents to condemn testing errors by the laboratory.
     
    Tags:


  2. Eldrack

    Eldrack New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2005
    Messages:
    1,353
    Likes Received:
    1
    Someone probably hacked into the computer and changed the number...........
     
  3. jhuskey

    jhuskey Moderator

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2003
    Messages:
    10,599
    Likes Received:
    338
    Damn metric system!
     
  4. Chance3290

    Chance3290 New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2004
    Messages:
    621
    Likes Received:
    0
    "The identification number of Floyd Landis was 995 474 while on the report it was listed as 994 474. That doesn't signify that the B sample did not belong to the American."

    OK then...what does it signify? Did the guy with 994 474 test high for "T" the next day? The day before?
    I don't have much faith in the french lab system.
     
  5. jhuskey

    jhuskey Moderator

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2003
    Messages:
    10,599
    Likes Received:
    338

    Yet you believe that the individuals named in Puerto are guilty?
     
  6. Chance3290

    Chance3290 New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2004
    Messages:
    621
    Likes Received:
    0
    where does it say that?
     
  7. jhuskey

    jhuskey Moderator

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2003
    Messages:
    10,599
    Likes Received:
    338

    A comment you made in another thread led me to believe this might be true.
     
  8. helmutRoole2

    helmutRoole2 New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2006
    Messages:
    1,948
    Likes Received:
    0
    Doa!
     
  9. jhuskey

    jhuskey Moderator

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2003
    Messages:
    10,599
    Likes Received:
    338
    What gentleman's agreement?" I gotta agree. Its hard to think that riders are doping and teams don't know anything about it. Now you have this righteous indignation. I take it with a grain of salt...and a magarita.
    There isn't innocent until proven guilty in Operatation Puerto. There's guilty and...maybe somewhere down the line we'll get back with you with some evidence.
    I believe in being thourogh, but if they wait until the start of next season to show the findings....I mean, what else do they have to do?


    Maybe I misread this.
     
  10. Chance3290

    Chance3290 New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2004
    Messages:
    621
    Likes Received:
    0
    "'What gentleman's agreement?' I gotta agree. Its hard to think that riders are doping and teams don't know anything about it. Now you have this righteous indignation. I take it with a grain of salt...and a magarita.
    There isn't innocent until proven guilty in Operatation Puerto. There's guilty and...maybe somewhere down the line we'll get back with you with some evidence.
    I believe in being thourogh, but if they wait until the start of next season to show the findings....I mean, what else do they have to do?"

    The part about doping and teams knowing, was meant for cycling in general, not just Puerto. With the majority of riders living in very close quarters during the season, its very hard to believe other riders and teams don't know who is doing what.
    BUT, if you are going to accuse someone of doping, you need your shit in order and your evidence ready to present.
    You don't say: "We have reason to believe that you are doping, so we are going to suspend you, then we're going to go look for evidence."
    If they're guilty, present the evidence and kick them out.
    If you don't have the proof, shut up and let them ride.
    By stringing them(and all of cycling, fans included) along, only to say "Well, we don't have evidence against this one....and that one...and this one...so now they can ride." that keeps suspicion over the rider's heads and also makes all the anti-doping organizations look very wishy-washy. (They need no help with that.)
     
  11. jhuskey

    jhuskey Moderator

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2003
    Messages:
    10,599
    Likes Received:
    338
    Exactly what I have posted previously. We know doping happens, but why would the UCI procede with such flimsy,and I use the term loosely,evidencein regard to Puerto.
    It failed to make cycling cleaner ,yet damaged the sport as a whole.
    The end did not justify the means in this case.
    I believe that Landis will come out with a technical win but with a dark cloud that will follow him forever.
     
  12. Chance3290

    Chance3290 New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2004
    Messages:
    621
    Likes Received:
    0
    Yes sir. If the guy did it..if any of them did it, kick them out, take their jerseys, trophies, titles, etc, away. BUT, have the proof before you smear their names.
    The hacking and now the admitted goofs make the lab sound like its run by Moe, Larry, and Curly.
    And the whole thing makes the anti-dopers sound like paper tigers.
     
  13. whiteboytrash

    whiteboytrash New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2005
    Messages:
    5,402
    Likes Received:
    0
    Thanks Chance3290 any chance you could get down to Capital Hill and sort out the mess with the post-war effort in Iraq ?

     
  14. Chance3290

    Chance3290 New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2004
    Messages:
    621
    Likes Received:
    0
    Can you please be more specific?
     
  15. JohnO

    JohnO New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2003
    Messages:
    1,495
    Likes Received:
    0
    Also from the lab, by way of a hacker...

    "we admit that there was a typing error - the name of the guilty rider was inadvertenly changed to Floyd Landis. It's an error regarding identification, a typing error that is of no signifigance to the findings"

    You have to admire them for this impressive display of chutzpah. Gallic obfustication is without peer.
     
  16. whiteboytrash

    whiteboytrash New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2005
    Messages:
    5,402
    Likes Received:
    0
    ...along with the spelling of "signifigance" ! Perhaps master the English language before you pontificate on the French and supposed ERRORS in lab typing..... tosser... obfuscation indeed !



     
  17. JohnO

    JohnO New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2003
    Messages:
    1,495
    Likes Received:
    0
    Aha - you've proved my point. I'm strictly a tyro at this business, the spinmeisters at LNDD are absolute pros. I stand in awe...
     
  18. Tim Lamkin

    Tim Lamkin New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2005
    Messages:
    646
    Likes Received:
    0
    This will lead to some huge issues for them, process, control, identification of issues and lack of resolve to correct. A lawyer will tear the crap out of that admission turning it into the entire way they do business.
     
  19. Serafino

    Serafino New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2005
    Messages:
    501
    Likes Received:
    0
    Better a spelling mistake in answer to an imbecile's ranting on an online forum than screwing up codes on a sample during the TdF. Make such a simple "mistake" and you can't be trusted anywhere near a lab.

    Oh, how I will relish the day if/when Landis is proven just in his allegations. What then WBT. What conspiracies will you bring to light for us?
     
  20. whiteboytrash

    whiteboytrash New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2005
    Messages:
    5,402
    Likes Received:
    0
    JonhO was proving his point by deliberately INSERTING spelling mistakes as was I with the correction of 'obfuscation' - dickhead.

    None the less I really don't care what Landis does because he has already tested positive twice for testosterone. What we await now is a long draw out show trial and schoolboy presentations of presentations by his showboating
    Hollywood lawyers. You see I have no conspiracies its your Mr. Landis who has the conspiracies. My story is positive A, positive B. End of story.
     
Loading...
Loading...