Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
Cos
Trad climber
California
|
|
In light of all the evidence and Landis' pretty unconvincing defense so far, I agree that he must have cheated. But I think that Gunkie and others have made some good points. Tampering, sample security, and/or the evil masseuse are about the only defenses that would seem even possible - but it seems pretty clear that none of these wild scenarios occured.
It would be interesting to see a complete analysis of all of Landis' samples. Their ratios must have been < 4:1, but what were they and was there also evidence of synthetic testosterone? It would be interesting to see all riders ratios to see how many approach the limit and how the riders compares with other groups.
|
|
TradIsGood
Trad climber
Gunks end of country
|
|
Cos and others.
Under the WADA code the athlete is responsible for testing clean. Evil masseuses do not matter. Illegal substances and markers make you guilty. The only defense is that the laboratory both used non-standard techniques and they can't defend the results using the non-standard technique (3.2.1, 3.2.2).
Here are the rules. You can skip to page 6, if you want.
http://www.wada-ama.org/rtecontent/document/code_v3.pdf
See 2.1 and 2.1.1. Their is no burden to show "intent, fault, negligence or knowing use" on the part of the athlete.
3.1 Standard of proof is "greater than mere balance of probability but less than reasonable doubt."
Article 9 - Disqualification is automatic.
Article 14 - Confidentiality and Reporting requirements.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!