According to an Associated Press article that’s been run on a number of sites, including the International Herald Tribune, the tests USADA has sought of Floyd Landis’ other B samples from the 2006 Tour de France have begun. According to the article:
“The analyses have indeed begun. USADA and Landis are each represented with two experts,” said Pierre Bordry, the head of the French anti-doping agency. “The analyses should last about 10 days.”
The results will be sent to USADA (and no doubt, leaked to L’Equipe shortly before), however, the article does not say if the results will also be sent to Landis’ defense team. If not, that could be a source of contention between the two sides, as USADA has a track record of being slow about producing documents requested by Landis’ defense team.
And, of course, it will be crucial to their defense to see those results, so that Landis’ lawyers know how to respond when (or if) USADA introduces the results as evidence at the arbitration hearing. The arbitration panel has not, however, decided yet whether the evidence will actually be admissible.
Given how much USADA wants to get their hands on supposedly relevant data so that they can prepare to refute any of the defenses that they anticipate the Landis side might make, it will be interesting to see if they deliver the results from these new tests in a timely manner.
Onwards. In another part of the AP story, the writer notes:
If doping allegations against the 31-year-old American are upheld, he faces a two-year ban from competition. He also would be the first rider in the 104-year history of the Tour to be stripped of the title.
The claim that Landis might be the first rider stripped of his Tour victory has been reported far and wide in a large number of stories over the last eight months. But there’s a small problem with that assertion: No matter the outcome of the Landis case, Floyd Landis will not be the first cyclist to be stripped of his Tour victory and title. That dubious honor belongs to Maurice Garin, as documented on the official Tour de France web site.
Although Maurice Garin technically won the race for the second year in a row, he, along with the rest of the top four, were disqualified for various infractions. As a result, little-known Henri Cornet, the fifth-place finisher, was declared the winner.
The other riders who were disqualified, from second to fourth place originally, were Lucien Pothier, César Garin, and Hippolyte Aucouturier. After an investigation by the French cycling union, the top four riders, along with all the stage winners, were disqualified in December 1904, due to rampant cheating during the race. This elevated Cornet, a 20-year-old rider who had finished the race in fifth place, to the status of Tour winner.
So it’s time for the mainstream media to stop repeating the canard that Landis will be the first rider in the history of the Tour to be stripped of his title. Even if he loses in May and loses before the Court of Arbitration for Sport, Maurice Garin was the first, and he’s in no danger of losing his dubious honor however the Landis case turns out.
The only thing that would be true is this: If Floyd Landis loses the case before the arbitrators in May, then he may be the first rider to be stripped of his title due to a doping violation. But that will happen only if the loss is upheld at the CAS, or if he is unable, financially, to appeal. I wouldn’t bet on that outcome, though. USADA looks to be on shakier ground right now, and if this process is run fairly (and that’s a big if), they have the better chance of losing the case right now.
Meanwhile, we all have to watch and wait and wonder what the outcome will be. And I wonder when the results will be leaked to L’Equipe. My guess is that it will be sometime shortly after testing is completed. If they work through next weekend, the lab could be done with the tests as early as the 26th. Which means sometime between the 27th and the 29th, the leaker at LNDD is likely to spill the story to L’Equipe. Unless, of course, they don’t get done before then.
And depending on just how quickly LNDD are able to put their lab documentation pack together, and then send it to USADA, the question will be: How much time will either side have to review the findings? My guess on that: Not much. But Landis’ side will have less time if they are forced to get the data from USADA, especially given USADA’s performance up to now. And I’m sure that suits Travis Tygart and his band of merry men just fine.
This comment system is not working
Sorry JBSMP,
Apparently, that system is a little too good at stopping spam comments from getting through.
I’ve deactivated the plugin, and it should be back to normal. Sorry for the inconvenience, everyone.
– Rant
Hi Rant:
I noticed you said “the arbitration pannel has not decided if the results of the tests will be admissable”. I saw this on TBV under the Part IV blog: “Our focus here is the Panel’s determination that additional “B” sample analysis is permitted, and will be admissible if non-negative, but will not be admissible if negative.” If true, this is awful — it seems to say that Floyd can only loose from further testing. I guess if “negative” that would mean the A’s were done correctly and there would be no need to admit the B’s — but, I figgured you’d want to know and check out this tidbit.
Steve,
I read the latest Judging Floyd piece, and that’s a disturbing turn of events. In the original opinion, however, the arbitrators also said:
I take that to mean there’s the possibility that the panel might not allow the evidence, if Landis’ attorneys can come up with some good reasons to keep the results out of the hearing. But, as Judge Hue and TBV note, the ruling is an ominous precedent not just for Floyd Landis, but for all future cases.
– Rant
What I wanted to ask was what this round of testing includes…does it include the full range of tests for all substances, just T/E ratios, and/or synthetic T as well?
As others have noted whether or not the B agrees with the A sample is almost as alarming a story as any new “positive” from the B samples. If the A and B do not agree, and the same lab is doing the work, then nothing from that lab can be trusted (at least based on the levels of detction they are employing). On the other hand, if B agrees with A, then what was the point?
I STILL think this is a USADA versus WADA power play with the spoils of where tests should be conducted the key element. In my opin, USADA wants tests done on americans in american labs, not done in french labs with a newpaper reporter standsing outside the office door. I think Floyd is just a pawn in a larger game. Call it trickle down economics, Lance style….
JBSMP,
Definitely they’re going after the CIR/IRMS tests for synthetic testosterone, to bolster any refutation that the Stage 17 test wasn’t a positive. I don’t know if they’re doing T/E ratios, or tests for other substances, too. I haven’t seen a definitive list of tests being performed. Maybe TBV has a handle on that. But they certainly want to find synthetic testosterone evidence from the other stages, so they can show that the results from Stage 17 aren’t an anomaly.
There’s definitely some power plays going on here. And, judging by the latest “Judging Floyd” there’s some judicial activism, carving out a new approach to convicting suspected dopers when labs have been shown to violate international standards, too.
– Rant