Originally Posted by
meanwhile
This is nonsesne in two different ways:
- Armstrong HAS had at least one positive test - it just wasn't legally enforceable. And the circumstances he raced under were such that, as the result of great effort by him, it was impossible for him to be tested properly later. Other tactics Armstrong have used including hiring strict anti-doping docs with a big
PR splash in the off season, then losing them before racing begins..
- As for "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence" - when someone harasses anti-drug cyclists, avoids testing, hires coaches and physicians who specialize in doping, surrounds himself with doped riders - and keeps up with their doped fueled performances - then the extraordinary claim is that they are NOT using dope!
It's only an extraordinary claim by Flandis since Lance has passed so many drug controls which are enforceable... I am skeptical of those tests which aren't legally enforceable. Even if there was another positive test... there have been so many negative tests that one could even assume - based off statistics that it's a false-positive test. Certainly there will be false-positive tests.
I'm not falling on either side here, but i really want some better evidence instead. This latest bit is just more finger pointing - nothing too exciting from the legal and evidence based side. We already new Landis doped during the tour.