Monday, October 22, 2007

The Iban Mayo case and how it helps Landis

Does anyone find it interesting that in Iban Mayo's case, the Spanish Cycling Federation had the common sense to test the B sample somewhere else other than the Chatenay-Malabry lab which is the same lab that had inconsistencies with the Landis' tests? Hmmmm... one can only wonder what would have happened if USADA had actually listened and agreed to the request to test the B samples from the other stages at a lab other than Chatenay-Malabry. Hopefully, WADA will shut down that lab or at a minimum, make it a regular practice of testing the B samples at 2 different labs.

Landis' legal team has to just LOVE this story. While Iban Mayo was caught for something different, Landis' legal team will infer that Mayo would have been wrongfully convicted if it were not for the testing at labs other than Chatenay-Malabry.

The Iban Mayo story may just be enough to swing the pedulum in Floyd's favor. Get ready for round 2 everyone.

For complete coverage:

For additional commentary:


Anne Gripper of the UCI said this today:

She said it would be another "five or six weeks" before the second round of tests is completed. Even if the follow-up tests are negative, the UCI said it might consider an appeal to the Court of Arbitration for Sport.

So, let me see if I get this right... if your A sample tests positive and the B sample tests negative, the UCI will try to get you suspended on the basis of the A sample by appealing to CAS. How much more screwed up can WADA and the UCI get about doping?? How about following your own rules for starters? Talk about a witch hunt.

All I can think of is that Monte Python sketch where they go around yelling "witch!!" I can't believe Landis hasn't spoken up about this, although maybe he is just waiting for it to play out. So far, everything the lab and UCI is doing should help Landis with his appeal to CAS.

No comments: