PLease post a transcript of the press conference here!

Not a transcript but this is the BBC report on the news conference

news.bbc.co.uk5225470.stmOpen ↗

bored_again said:

Not a transcript but this is the BBC report on the news conference

news.bbc.co.uk5225470.stmOpen ↗

I like how it took him 36 hours to say "I produce high levels of testosterone naturally" after a conversation with the Doctor from Madrid.... what a crock ! Fark off Landis we don't want you in our sport....

My own favourite was 'I'm not involved in a doping process' repeated ad nauseam. Well, what's the conference about Floyd? Not exactly an earth-shattering conference, although I see Eurosport are saying the B sample results should be known by Monday

bored_again said:

My own favourite was 'I'm not involved in a doping process' repeated ad nauseam. Well, what's the conference about Floyd? Not exactly an earth-shattering conference, although I see Eurosport are saying the B sample results should be known by Monday

Lance is not FLoyd.
It tool him two to three days to get his press and agent son top of the story instead of spinning it from the first hour.
That seems more plausible to me.

I mean if he were positive for EPO in the first sample or some other exogenos drug I think it would be different. I think a wait and see approach makes the most sense.

Clearly, FL isn't a very polished speaker, and isn't used to the limelight.
One thing that is a lot different is that FL seems a lot more willing than others (JU) to do/take additional tests (endocrological, DNA, etc.) to prove his innocence.
We'll have to wait and see, kind of like OP when it broke, to the eve of the Tour start.

I agree that wait and see is the only fail-safe approach, and in that light I think Perreiro is the only one to come out of this with much credit.
Landis obviously isn't media trained, and this might be the reason for the strange quotes, although he was obviously reading a prepared statement that, I assume, was written for him.
Even so, 'I'm not involved in a doping process' seems a strange way to say 'I'm clean', 'I don't take banned drugs' or 'I've never doped'. But the B test might be more conclusive than examining a news conference

cPritch67 said:

One thing that is a lot different is that FL seems a lot more willing than others (JU) to do/take additional tests (endocrological, DNA, etc.) to prove his innocence.

He has no choice, if the B-probe is positive as well they have proof. I am not convinced that the UCI has proof against a lot of riders who are involved in the Fuentes affair (remeber first 6 riders are racing again, 5 of Astana, 1 of Unibet.com)